Ramgopal vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 5621 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:24793]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4284/2020 Ramgopal S/o Shri Ramniwas, Aged About 39 Years, By Caste Jat, R/o Village Nimbadi Kothariya, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Supplies And Consumer Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The District Supply Officer, Nagaur, Rajasthan.

                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :    Mr. Manish Patel
For Respondent(s)              :    Mr. Dinesh Jain


         HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
                       Order
04/08/2023

1.    Learned        counsel       for   the    petitioner          submits   that    the

controversy involved in the writ petition is covered by the

judgment dated 11.06.2020 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4668/2020 (Lokesh Pareek Vs.

State of Rajasthan and Anr.) which is reproduced as under:-

The counsel for the parties are in agreement that the controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by the judgment dated 05.06.2020 passed by a coordinate bench of this court in a batch of writ petitions led by S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.4285/2020 (Bala Ram V/s State of Rajasthan & Ors.) wherein following directions were given:-

"(18) Hence, in the facts peculiar to the present cases, as noticed above, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of all these writ petitions with a direction to respondent no.3 - DSO, Nagaur to conclude the inquiry as early as possible, preferably before 31st July, 2020.

[2023:RJ-JD:24793] (2 of 3) [CW-4284/2020]

(19) It will be enjoined upon the competent authority to conduct the inquiry in fair manner while observing principles of natural justice, and adhering to the Order of 1976 and relevant law. The Inquiry Officer shall point out the discrepancies found at the shop of the concerned petitioner and elicit their response/explanation. (20) Needless to observe that the petitioners shall also co-operate in the enquiry and will neither create unnecessary hurdles nor will they thwart the enquiry.

(21) Till the enquiry is completed and final orders pursuant to inquiry in furtherance of suspension orders are passed, the order(s) of suspension and consequential attachment passed qua each of the petitioners shall remain in abeyance. Needless toobserve that each of the petitioners shall be permitted to carry on his/her business or operations pursuant to the authorization letter, till the enquiry is concluded.

(22) In case, the competent authority/DSO finds that the authorization/license of a particular dealer is required to be cancelled or any other just order is warranted, he will pass speaking order and serve the same upon such dealer either personally or by registered post AD. The order of punishment or cancellation shall be operative only after its service upon the concerned dealer.

(23) Needless to observe that petitioners, thereafter, will be free to take appropriate remedies available to them under law".

In view of above, the present petition is also disposed of in the terms as in the case of Bala Ram (supra)."

2. Learned counsel for the respondent does not refute the

submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. Thus, in view of the aforesaid submissions made the present

writ petition is disposed of in the same terms and conditions as

[2023:RJ-JD:24793] (3 of 3) [CW-4284/2020]

mentioned in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4668/2020 (Lokesh

Pareek Vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr.).

4. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand

disposed of.

(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J 18-Hanuman/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)