Jalil Ahmad S/O Shri Chhote Khan vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 510 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

                  D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 483/2020

Jalil Ahmad S/o Shri Chhote Khan, Aged About 67 Years, Fair
Price Shop Keeper, Pos Code - 3038, Khedli Phatak, Distt. - Kota
(Raj.).
                                                                      ----Appellant
                                      Versus
1.        State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Food,
          Civil   Supply     And       Consumer           Matters     Department,
          Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.        District Collector (Supply), District - Kota.
3.        District Supply Officer, Kota.
                                                                   ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Keshav Kumar Agarwal through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Udit Sharma through VC for Mr. Rajesh Mahershi, AAG

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

20/01/2022

The appeal arises out of the order dated 15.05.2020 passed

by the learned Single Judge in SBCWP No.1985/2020. The

appellant-original petitioner had in his petition challenged the

order dated 25.05.2018 by which his licence to run a fair price

shop granted by the Government was suspended. In the petition,

he had relied on a Division Bench judgment of this court in the

case of Hansraj Gurjar Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, DBSAW

No. 1996/2014 dated 16.12.2014 in which after referring to the

rule position it was held that no such suspension would survive

(2 of 2) [SAW-483/2020]

beyond 90 days without giving opportunity to the holder of the

authorization to state the case.

The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the

ground of late approach to the High Court it was recorded that the

order of suspension of license was passed on 25.5.2018 whereas

the writ petition was filed challenging the suspension order on

20.01.2020.

In our opinion, the petition cannot be stated to be so

hopelessly delayed that the petitioner's claim which was otherwise

supported by the judgment of the Division Bench could have been

destroyed. If at all the state authority should have been cognizant

of the judgment of the Division Bench and should have recalled

the suspension order after 90 days.

In the result, appeal is allowed, order of the learned Single

Judge is reversed. It is declared that the suspension of the licence

of the petitioner to run a fair price shop does not survive any

further. However, the liberty to the petitioner to act on his original

licence would be subject to further enquiry and proceedings which

the department may initiate in accordance with law.

Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

                                   (SAMEER JAIN),J                                                      (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

                                   BRIJ MOHAN GANDHI / 81









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)