1. The petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 comprising holders of fair price shop licence under Barpeta Sub-division in the District of Barpeta represented by its Secretary. 2. The grievance of the petitioner-association as projected in this writ petition is that the civil supply authorities have undertaken the process to issue new fair price shop licence under the provision of Assam Public Distribution of Articles Order, 1982 in violation of the established norms and procedures thereby reducing their chances of profit in the business who are existing licensee of fair price shop. 3. I have heard Mr. S. Sarma learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel appearing for the official respondents and Mr. A.M. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 8 to 11. 4. The pleaded case of the petitioner-association, inter alia, is that they are the existing licensee under the Assam Public Distribution of Articles Order, 1982 by the civil supply authorities. There is a set of guidelines for issuing such hence and such guideline was issued by the Government on 17.6.1993 wherein it was provided that the fair price shops are opened on population basis. Normally, in rural areas a fair price shop covers around 800-1,000 people while in urban areas a population of 1,000-1,200 is covered. That apart, the topography of the area/natural barriers such as rivers, beels, etc., are also required to be taken into consideration irrespective of the population, while considering opening of a fair price shop. It is further pleaded that the Government vide W.T. Message dated 24.7.1996 directed not to issue fresh licence for fair price shops. The members of the petitioner-association were granted such licence on the basis of the population ratio in their respective area of operation and in some cases such population ratio is below the prescribed limit as fixed vide Circular dated 17.6.1993. Further contention of the petitioner is that the members of the association are finding difficult to run their fair price shop allotted in their favour as well as to make profit for their livelihood by running such fair price shop as the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta has issued new fair price shop licence in favour of the private respondents. Further contention of the petitioner is that the members of the association are finding difficult to run their fair price shop allotted in their favour as well as to make profit for their livelihood by running such fair price shop as the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta has issued new fair price shop licence in favour of the private respondents. It is also contended that due to issuance of such fresh licence, the profit margin of the members of the petitioner-association has gone down and it is not permissible to issue fresh licnece without maintaining the population ratio. The petitioner, however, specifically pleaded that they do not have any objection in issuing fresh licence of fair price shop but such issue should be strictly in accordance with the guidelines mentioned above. Accordingly, challenging the allotment of fresh licence to the private respondents, the petitioner association have approached this court praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari. 5. A counter has been filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta, respondent No. 4. In the counter, it is pleaded that although the Government imposed restriction of fresh fair price shop licence/retail outlet and retailers/sub-dealer of SK oil vide letter dated 9.11.1998 but subsequently the Government has allowed the licensing authority to issue fair price shop licence under the Assam Public Distribution Articles Order, 1982 without prior approval from the State Government vide letter No. FSA.42/2003/72 dated 8.6.2005 and after fulfilment of the necessary criteria, appointment of fair price shop agent is made by the licensing authority. It is categorically contended in the counter that fresh issuance of licences have been issued in view of the greater interest of the consumer after fulfilment of the necessary criteria and complying with the necessary requirement and population criteria as fixed by the Government vide letter dated 18.8.1994. 6. The private respondent Nos. 8, 9, 10 and 11 have also filed their common counter wherein it is contended that as the time passes out the population of the concerned Gaon Panchayat area are increasing and the fresh licences are required to be issued on public demand for greater interest of the rural consumer and there is no illegality in issuing such licence. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties which is mostly based on their pleadings. The basic contention of the petitioner, as raised by Mr. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties which is mostly based on their pleadings. The basic contention of the petitioner, as raised by Mr. Sarma is that by issuance of such licence of fair price shop, the business of the members of the petitioner-association has been adversely affected and there having no complaint against them about the misuse of the licence the curtailment of their business amounts to violation of their valuable right. It is also reiterated that the petitioner-association cannot have any legitimate objection in granting fresh licence in compliance with the guidelines dated 17.6.1993. The contention of the private respondents is that the guidelines-issued about 15 years back would not be applicable in the present factual scenario in view of the increase of population in the area. That apart, such licences have been issued in the area for the greater interest of the increased rural consumers and accordingly the licensing authority has thought it fit on public interest to grant more such licences to which the petitioner-association is not entitled to object. 8. The Assam Public Distribution Articles Order, 1982 hereinafter referred to as ('Control Orders') is a statutory order issued in exercise of power conferred under section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Section 3 of the E.G. Act empowers the Government to issue orders providing for regulating or prohibiting the production/supply and distribution and trade and commerce of any essential commodities if the Government considers it necessary so to do for maintaining or increasing supplies of any essential commodities for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices. Such order may provide for regulating of licence, permits or otherwise the production or manufacture of any essential commodity for storage, transport, distribution, disposal, acquisition or consumption of any essential commodities and alike. The control order issued under section 3 of the E.G. Act provides that the licensing authority may issue licence in the Form 1 to such appointed dealer as may be considered necessary from time to time specifying the area of operation. In the control order there is no mention about the population for which such a licence may be issued. The control order issued under section 3 of the E.G. Act provides that the licensing authority may issue licence in the Form 1 to such appointed dealer as may be considered necessary from time to time specifying the area of operation. In the control order there is no mention about the population for which such a licence may be issued. The whole object of issuance of such licence or appointment of dealers is for the purpose of maintaining or increasing supplies of essential commodities and for controlling the price as essential commodities that may be bought or sold and for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair price. 9. From the scheme of section 3 of the E.G. Act and the control order there is no manner of doubt that such order has been issued for equitable distribution of essential commodities and making available at fair price for all at a time or countrywide food shortage, the determination of quantity to be procured or allowed to be retained by a producers and to prohibit monopoly. 10. Interpreting section 3 of the E.G. Act the Apex Court in Mis. Diwan Sugar & General Mills (P.) Ltd. and Others v. The Union of India, AIR 1959 SC 626 has held inter alia that reading of section 3 of the Act with the preamble, it would be obvious that the object of the Act, is to provide for control of the production supply and distribution of trade and commerce in essential commodities in the interests of the general public, so that supplies of such commodities may be maintained or increased, their equitable distribution secured and they may be available to the general public at fair prices. 11. Considering the aforesaid objectives in issuing licence under the control order so empowered to issue under section 3 of the E.G. Act, the licences for fair price shops are issued to the individuals only for the purpose of public interest as indicated above so that supply of essential commodities may be maintained on regular basis and equitable distribution is secured and such commodities may be made available to the general public at fair price. 12. Population pattern as fixed vide letter dated 17.6.1993, i.e., 15 years back obviously would not be applicable in the present stage. 12. Population pattern as fixed vide letter dated 17.6.1993, i.e., 15 years back obviously would not be applicable in the present stage. That apart, in this busy day one fair price shop catering the need of 1,000-1,200 people has rightly been considered as not sufficient for the consumers. During the present busy schedule of life for the greater interest and benefit of the consumers, the number of fair price shops are to be increased proportionately, that apart, the area where such a fair price shops were issued long back has got continuous increase of population which is also another factor to be considered by the authority. 13. The grievance of the petitioner is that after issuance of such fair price licence to the private respondents, their profit margin would be decreased. Such profit making consideration, in terms of the scheme of the order, cannot be said to be legitimate consideration for issuing of fresh licence. From the pleadings of the parties it appears that the licences have already been issued to the private respondents and they are rendering their service and catering the needs of the consumers. 14. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and the prevailing situation in its entirety, I am of the view that the petitioner has failed to make out a case for interference in the extraordinary jurisdiction of this writ court under article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the absence of violation of any statutory provision or arbitrariness to have committed by the respondents authorities, the action undertaken by the respondents for issuing licence under the control order is not to be interfered with by this court. 15. Accordingly, this writ petition fails and stands dismissed. 16. No costs.