LPA/245/2022 of ABDUL REHMAN RATHER AND ORS. Vs UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS. (FOOD AND SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT) on 31 December 2022

Conclusion

1) The appellants have challenged order dated 06.09.2022 passed by learned Writ Court whereby the writ petition filed by respondent No.7 herein has been disposed of at the threshold by observing as under:

“The short grievance projected by the petitioner in this petition is that the Government of Jammu and Kashmir vide order No. FCS &CA/FPS/134/2017 dated 25.09.2017 accorded approval for the issuance of fair price shop license in favour of various persons including the petitioner.

In pursuance to the approval granted, the Assistant Director, FCS & CA Department, Budgam vide office Order No. 94-FCS & CA/Budg/2018 dated 28.05.2018 granted formal license of fair price shop in favour of the petitioner at Thokerpora, Budgam.

It is submitted that the petitioner has ever since supplying ration to the rationee attached to his shop without any interference or hindrance from any quarter. The petitioner now is apprehending that the private respondent can play some mischief and get the ration attached to his shop shifted to some other shop. The apprehension of the petitioner is not supported by any material on record.

Be that as it may, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of by providing that the respondents shall ensure that proper supply of ration is made to the petitioner for its disbursement to the rationee attached to his fair price shop so long he holds license issued by the competent authority. The supply of ration and disbursement thereof shall be strictly in conformity with the norms laid down by the Department of FCS & CA.”

2) It has been contended by learned counsel for the appellants that the impugned order has been passed by the learned Writ Court without issuing notice to the respondents and that the said order has been obtained by respondent No.7/writ petitioner by suppressing material facts before the Writ Court. It has been submitted that the writ petitioner has indulged in all sorts of malpractices so far as the distribution of ration to the inhabitants is concerned and, in this regard, repeated representations have been made by the people of the area to the Deputy Commissioner, Budgam, praying therein that registration of the writ petitioner’s Fair Price Shop be cancelled. It is further submitted that these representations of the inhabitants of the area did not yield any result and in the meanwhile, the writ petitioner approached this Court and obtained an ex-parte order which has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. According to the appellants, passing of the impugned order has resulted in tying down the hands of the official respondents from exercising their powers relating to cancelation of the license of the writ petitioner.

3) We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the material on record.

4) As is clear from the afore-quoted impugned order passed by the learned Writ Court, the only direction that has been issued to the official respondents is that they shall ensure that proper supply of ration is made to the writ petitioner for its disbursement to the ration holders attached to his Fair Price Shop so long he holds the license issued by the competent authority. It has been further provided that the supply of ration and disbursement thereof shall be strictly in conformity with the norms laid down by the Department of FCS & CA.

5) Thus the Writ Court has only asked the official respondents to supply ration to the writ petitioner’s Fair Price Shop till he holds the license issued by the competent authority. The impugned order does not restrain the official respondents from taking action against the writ petitioner in case it is found by them that he is indulging in any sort of malpractices or in case he violates any condition of the licence. The order of the Writ Court does not come in the way of the official respondents in taking any action against the writ petitioner. Thus, it cannot be stated that any prejudice has been caused to the appellants by passing of the impugned order. In fact, in the impugned order, the learned Writ Court has clearly observed that supply of the ration and its distribution has to be strictly as per the norms. No right of the appellants has been violated nor has any prejudice been caused to them by the aforesaid order of the Writ Court. Thus, the appellants have no cause to feel aggrieved of the impugned order.

6) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. It is, however, made clear that the official respondents are at liberty to deal with the representations stated to have been made by the inhabitants of the area against the writ petitioner, in accordance with the law.

(M. A. CHOWDHARY) (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JUDGE

SRINAGAR 31.12.2022“Bhat Altaf, PS”Whether the order is speaking: Yes/NoWhether the order is reportable: Yes/No