AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjay Yadav, J.—Heard on admission.
The petition is directed against the order dated 5.2.2014; whereby, the licence for Fair Price Shop at Lakhanpura and Sunder Dadar has been suspended by the Sub-Divisional Officer Pali District Umaria in exercise of his powers under the Madhya Pradesh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2009. That, order dated 1.7.2014 which affirms the order of suspension is also being assailed.
Various irregularities were noticed by the Assistant Supply Officer Pali in respect of operation of said Fair Price Shops in his report dated 25.9.2013.
Following irregularities in the distribution were noticed
Show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 2.10.2013 who furnished his reply; whereon, the proceedings were drawn wherein, the petitioner was held guilty of the irregularities which led the Licencing Authority to cancel the licence. In appeal, the Appellate Authority affirmed by order of suspension.
Relying on the show cause notice dated 1.10.2013, it is contended on behalf of petitioner that Sub-Divisional Officer exceeded its jurisdiction in recording a finding which is beyond the scope of show cause notice. The show cause notice which the petitioner relies upon relates to the report of Tahsildar Pali in respect of the inspection which he carried out on 29.9.2013. Whereas, the suspension of Fair Price Shop is on the basis of complaints and the report furnished by Assistant Supply Officer.
Thus, there are two different events for which the petitioner was proceeded against. One was as to report by the Assistant Supply Officer and another was as to report by Tahsildar Pali.
For the irregularities committed by the petitioner and as reported by Assistant Supply Officer, the petitioner was issued show cause on 2.10.2013 which was duly replied by the petitioner. This fact is evident from the appellate order dated 1.7.2014; wherein Appellate Authority categorically recorded -
Whereas, for the irregularities committed on 29.9.2013, another show cause notice was issued on 1.10.2013, which was separately replied by the petitioner on 4.10.2013.
Clause 11 of the Control Order 2009 stipulates -
"11. Punishment and Penalty:
(1) In case of contravening any provision of central order or this order by any co-operative institution running the fair price shop, the authority letter shall be suspended or revoked and the security deposit shall be forfeited and in such a case, the forfeited amount shall be recoverable from the erring employee of the concerned society.
(2) The shop allotment officer cannot revoke the licence as per sub-clause (1) without issuing the show cause notice to the concerned fair price shop and till such time an opportunity has been given to the fair price shop holder to put forth its arguments in writing and after reasonable opportunity has been given, the shop allotment officer in a reasoned order shall suspend the licence and the shop allotment officer shall issue a show cause notice within ten days of suspending the fair price shop following the principles of natural justice giving a reasonable opportunity to the fair price shop holder and ensure that the final order be passed within three months.
(3) If it is found that the fair price shop has distributed food grains to any ineligible persona or that the food grains have been diverted, then the value of the same shall be recovered from the responsible salesman/employee/person and such amount shall be recoverable as arrears of land revenue.
(4) If any fair price shop/society through its manager, salesman or any other person has contravened the terms and conditions of this order or the central order or any direction issued by the State Government/Commissioner/Collector/Shop Allotment Officer, the competent authority shall proceed as per sub-clause (1) and forfeit security deposit wholly or partially:
Provided that the forfeiture can be invoked only after giving a reasonable opportunity to the institution for being heard and thereafter pass a reasoned order.
(5) In the event of a fair price shop violating the conditions of the central order or this order, the Collector can initiate action under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
(6) Before removal of salesman, the primary agricultural co-operative society has to issue a removal order in writing and in case of serious irregularity prosecution can be initiated.
(7) In cases of serious irregularity prosecution proceedings shall be initiated and in such cases, the prosecution shall not be restricted to the society or to the sales man but the society may also prosecute the Manager and in case the Chairman in also involved in irregularities, the prosecution proceedings may also be initiated against him.
(8) In the event of a lead society contravening any provision of this order, action may be initiated against the concerned alongwith suspension of the person concerned and further a portion or the entire security deposit may be forfeited.
(9) In the even of lead societies being unable to lift the food grains and transport the same or in the event of delay, prosecution proceedings may be initiated against the society.
(10) In the event of a responsible officer of the authorized nominee of the State Government, not being able to store the essential commodities of the Public distribution system in time, or failing to transport the same in time, or for any other irregularity, prosecution proceedings may be initiated against him.
(11) The authorised nominee of the State Government shall issue show cause notice in writing and give an opportunity to the officer concerned, before institution of prosecution under sub-clauses (8), (9), and (10).
In the case at hand, as observed, the petitioner was given the show cause in respect of irregularities reported by the Assistant Supply Officer and after drawing the proceedings, the charges were found proved.
The findings of fact as to the irregularities being affirmed in Appeal, no interference is caused.
Consequently, petition fails and is dismissed. No costs.