CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Kasturi Lal vs Commissioner Garhwal Mandal and Another

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 22 November 2010 · Citation: (2010) 11 UK CK 0011

HON’BLE JUDGES
Brahma Singh Verma, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 1077 of 2008 (M/S)
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 332 words

B.S. Verma, J.—Heard Mr. Lok Pal Singh, Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. N.P. Shah, Standing Counsel for the Respondents.

2.

By means of this petition the Petitioner has sought the writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 10-10-2007 and 21-06-2008 passed by the Respondents 2 and 1 respectively, contained as Annexures Nos. 1 and 7 to this writ petition.

3.

The grievance of the Petitioner is that he was running a Fair Price Shop. All of a sudden without serving any show cause notice and without conducting enquiry and affording an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, the Respondent No. 2, S.D.M. Haridwar passed order dated 10-10-2007, whereby the shop of the Petitioner was cancelled and the Ration Cards of Petitioner''s shop were attached with another Fair Price Shop. Aggrieved by the order of S.D.M. Haridwar, the Petitioner preferred appeal No. 11 of 2007-08 before the Commissioner Garhwal Mandal. The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner vide impugned order dated 21-06-2008. Hence this petition.

4.

According to the Petitioner, S.D.M. Haridwar without conducting enquiry and issuing notice to the Petitioner as well as affording an opportunity of hearing cancelled the Fair Price Shop, and the order passed by the S.D.M. is arbitrary and is not maintainable. His further allegations is that the G.O. dated 15-10-2005 only speaks about the allotment of shop and it does not affect the shop allotted earlier to the election of Village Pradhan or Up Pradhan and the learned Commissioner also failed to appreciate the contents of the G.O.

5.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case the matter is liable to remitted to the court below.

6.

The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 21-6-2008 (Annexure No. 7 to the writ petition), passed by Commissioner Garhwal Mandal is set aside. The matter is remitted to the appellate court for deciding the same afresh in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all parties, as expeditiously as possible.