Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 480 (RAJ)

Mohan Singh S/o Jang Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2019-02-11

INDERJEET SINGH

body2019
ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.08.2018 passed by the District Supply Officer, Hanumangarh whereby license of Fair Price Shop of the petitioner was suspended. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents issued license of Fair Price Shop in favour of the petitioner at village Kikarwali, Tehsil Sangariya in the year 1998. One Hazi Khan filed a complaint against the petitioner and on said complaint, litigation between the parties travelled up to court of Additional Food Commissioner, Rajasthan, Jaipur who vide judgment dated 13.06.2018 remanded the matter back to the District Supply Officer for deciding the complaint afresh. Thereafter, license of the petitioner was restored by the District Supply Officer vide order dated 13.07.2018. 4. Being aggrieved by the order dated 13.07.2018, respondent No. 5 Hazi Khan filed an appeal before District Collector, Hanumangarh, who vide order dated 13.08.2018 remanded the matter back to the District Supply Officer, Hanumangarh for deciding the same afresh. 5. The District Supply Officer vide order dated 27.08.2018 again suspended license of the petitioner though there was no such direction by the District Collector to suspend the license of the petitioner. Hence present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 27.08.2018 passed by the District Supply Officer, Hanumangarh. 6. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned District Collector vide order dated 13.08.2018 only remanded the matter back to the District Supply Officer for deciding the matter on merits and there was no direction to suspend the license of petitioner, therefore, the District Supply Officer has committed illegality in suspending the license of the petitioner and prayed for quashing the order dated 27.08.2018 passed by the District Supply Officer, Hanumangarh. 7. Counsel for the respondents submitted that the matter is still pending before the District Supply Officer, therefore, the District Supply Officer may be directed to decide the same expeditiously. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record of the case. 9. This Court while issuing notices to the respondents on 06.09.2018, passed following order: “Heard and perused the material available on record. Issue notice of the writ petition as well as the stay application to the respondents. Rule is made returnable in four weeks. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record of the case. 9. This Court while issuing notices to the respondents on 06.09.2018, passed following order: “Heard and perused the material available on record. Issue notice of the writ petition as well as the stay application to the respondents. Rule is made returnable in four weeks. In the meantime, the effect and operation of the order (Annex.5) dated 27.08.2018 passed by the DSO Hanumangarh suspending the fair price shop license of the petitioner shall remain stayed.” 10. I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and in my considered view, the writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be allowed for the reasons; firstly, the District Collector, Hanumangarh vide order dated 13.08.2018 only remanded the matter back to the District Supply Officer, Hanumangarh for deciding the same afresh on merits and there was no direction by the District Collector to suspend the license of the petitioner. Secondly, the District Supply Officer, Hanumangarh has committed illegality in suspending the license of the petitioner without application of mind. 11. In that view of the matter, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order dated 27.08.2018 (Annx.5) passed by the District Supply Officer, Hanumangarh is set aside. Since the matter is pending before the District Supply Officer, Hanumangarh, I deem it just and proper to direct the District Supply Officer, Hanumangarh to decide the complaint filed by the respondent No. 5 against the petitioner within a period of three month.