Madhya Pradesh High Court
WP/2537/2024 of RAKESH KUMAR GOYAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKEON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 2537 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
RAKESH KUMAR GOYAL S/O LATE SHRI LAXMANDAS,AGED-60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O LAXMIFLOUR MILL DAULATGANJ LASHKAR GWALIOR(MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI SANJAY BATHAM- ADVOCATE)
.....PETITIONER
AND
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPALSECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL(MADHYA PRADESH)SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL(MADHYA PRADESH)
2.COLLECTOR GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3.THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER CUM ADDITIONALDIST. MAGISTRATE GWALIOR (MADHYAPRADESH)DIST. MAGISTRATE GWALIOR (MADHYAPRADESH)
4.DESIGNATED OFFICER FOOD SAFETYA D M I N I S TR ATI O N GWALIOR (MADHYAPRADESH)A D M I N I S TR ATI O N GWALIOR (MADHYAPRADESH)
5.AVNISH GUPTA FOOD SAFETY OFFICER FOODDEPARTMENT BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)DEPARTMENT BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI K.S. TOMAR- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE )
.....RESPONDENTS
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has A- That, the impugned action of the respondentwhereby the petitioner premises has been lockedmay kindly be quashed and direction may kindlybe issued to the respondent for unlocking thepremises immediately.
B- That, further direction may kindly be given tothe respondents to decide the representation ofpetitioner within stipulated time.
C- That other relief which it deems fit may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.
A limited prayer has been made by the counsel for the petitioner that the respondent no.4 may kindly be directed to decide the representation AnnexureP/1 filed by the petitioner, as the respondent no.4 is sitting tight over the matterand had not decided the representation till date. Therefore, if directions areissued to the respondent no.4 to decide the same, the grievance of thepetitioner would be redressed.
P er contra, learned Government Advocate has no objection if suchdirections are issued to the respondent no.4 for deciding the representation.
Looking to the innocuous prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner,the petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no.4 to decide therepresentation Annexure P/1 filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possiblepreferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certifiedcopy of the order.
With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.
E-copy/Certified copy as per rules and directions.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)