Adarsh Gram Panchayat Stariya Mahila Bahudeshiya Sahkari Samiti Maryadit vs SDO, Niwari and Others

Rajendra Menon, J.—This writ petition was filed in the year 2001 challenging the order-dated 31.3.2001 - Annexure P/9 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Niwari and an order-dated 24.2.2001 passed by the District Yojana Samiti, Tikamgarh in the matter of cancelling the fair price shop license granted to the petitioner society in Gram Panchayat Area Sakera Bhandaran, Block Prithvipur, District Tikamgarh. Petitioner claims to be a Society registered under the MP Cooperative Societies Act and they were granted the license to run the fair price shop in accordance to the statutory scheme namely the MP (Khadya Padarth) Sarvajanik Nagrik Purti Vitran Scheme, 1991, formulated under the MP Food Stuff and Distribution Control Order, 1960. It is the case of the petitioner that finding the petitioner to be fulfilling all the requirements as was contemplated in the Scheme of 1991, the fair price shop in question was granted to them. However, after the fair price shop was granted in accordance to the requirement of the Scheme, it seems that a Citizen Charter was implemented wherein in the matter of establishment of fair price shops certain powers were given to the District Planning Board. In the Citizen Charter, it was indicated that in the rural areas preference should be given to Service Cooperative Societies instead of giving preference to Sahkari Bhandar like the petitioner namely Private Societies. Based on the recommendations and stipulations contained in the Citizen Charter, as the impugned action is taken, petitioner has filed the writ petition.

The main ground canvassed is that the Citizen Charter is an Executive Instruction, administrative in nature, and when the statutory scheme of 1991 contemplates a procedure for grant of license to run fair price shop and when license has been granted to the petitioner in accordance to the said statutory scheme, cancellation of the license based on Executive Instruction is said to be unsustainable. It was emphasized by Shri R.K. Samaiya that when the Scheme in question was still in existence when the impugned action was taken, the action of interfering into the matter based on the Executive Instructions was unsustainable. Learned counsel further invites my attention to a judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court at Gwalior, on 2.12.2012, in Writ Appeal No. 52/2012 (Shaktipunj Anusuchit Jati Mahila Bauddesiya Sahakari Sansthan Maryadit Gram Panchayat Diadari Vikas Khand Ashok Nagar Vs. State of MP and others) to say that the license granted to the petitioner under the Scheme of 1991 cannot be cancelled.

As indicated hereinabove, the matter is pending since 2001 and at the time of admission of the matter, status quo was directed to be maintained. However, as more than 11 years have passed due to pendency of this petition, when the case was taken up for hearing on 30.10.2012 and on 18.12.2012, a query was made by this Court to the Advocate General to indicate as to what is the present position with regard to functioning of the fair price shop in question. A detailed additional submission has been filed on 2.1.2013, and it is stated that till date in the matter of running of fair price shop against the petitioner no action has been taken, but it is also pointed out that now a new statutory scheme namely the MP Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2009 has come into force and now the running of the fair price shop is to be done in accordance with the aforesaid scheme. The statutory scheme is filed an Annexure AR/1, alongwith the additional submission. It is stated by the respondents now that as per this statutory scheme, petitioner is not entitled to run the fair price shop in rural area as the Scheme of 2009 contemplates only running of fair price shop by society like the petitioner in urban area. As far as rural areas are concerned, it is stated that the petitioner''s society is not entitled to function in the rural area, as in rural areas only Primary Agricultural Cooperative Societies and Laghu Vano Upaj Sahakari Societies are entitled to function.

However, Shri R.K. Samaiya submits that by virtue of the saving clause available in the present statutory scheme, petitioner''s right and license granted is protected. In support of his contention, learned counsel again placed reliance on the judgment rendered in the case of Shaktipunj Anusuchit Jati Mahila Bauddesiya Sahakari Sansthan Maryadit (supra).

Be it as it may be, the fact remains that the allotment of fair price shop, which is the dispute of the present petition, is now covered by a statutory scheme as is evident from Annexure AR/1. That being so, the Collector of the District concerned is directed to re-examine the question of allotment of the fair price shop, of the area in question, in accordance to the statutory scheme as is applicable now and re-determine the question in accordance to the scheme, and the judgment rendered in the case of Shaktipunj Anusuchit Jati Mahila Bauddesiya Sahakari Sansthan Maryadit (supra).

However, before taking a decision in the matter and if any adverse action is to be taken against the petitioner/society, the Collector shall cause a notice to be given to the petitioner/society, hear them and thereafter decide the matter in accordance with law by a speaking order. The Collector shall take note of the requirement of the statutory scheme, the submissions to be made by the petitioner society with regard to the petitioner''s rights and liabilities, available to them, under saving clause, if any, and after evaluating the entire policy of the State Government as is applicable, shall take a decision in the matter.

Till a decision in the matter, as indicated hereinabove, is not taken, the working in accordance to the interim order passed by this Court shall continue to remain in force.

As the matter is being remanded back, the impugned actions are quashed and a fresh decision be taken.

Accordingly, the petition stands allowed and disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.