Sheopat Ram Godara S/o Late Shri Bhoora Ram vs Additional Food Commissioner, Department of Food

By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the order

dated 18.12.2015 at annexure-12 and 20.7.2016 at annexure-21,

passed by the District Supply Officer-II, Bikaner, order dated

17.10.2016 at annexure-25 passed by the Collector, Bikaner in

appeal and the order dated 12.4.2017 at annexure-27 passed by

the Additional Food Commissioner, Food & Civil Supplies

Department, Jaipur on a revision.

Learned counsel submits that without providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, cancellation of

authorisation of fair price shop was made. When petitioner

preferred an appeal before the Collector, it was allowed vide order

dated 8.6.2016. It was with a direction to supply copy of the

report dated 16.12.2015 and thereupon the matter may be

decided afresh after providing an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner. The order was again passed on 20.7.2016 though

petitioner was not supplied any document referred in the report

dated 16.12.2015, rather, a vague show cause notice was given

to him hence a proper opportunity of hearing was denied. The

petitioner preferred an appeal and subsequently revision petition

but without considering any of the objections raised therein, order

of the DSO was endorsed. In view of the above, this petition has

been filed to challenge all the orders with a prayer to set aside

them with restoration of authorisation of the fair price shop in

favour of the petitioner.

I have considered submissions of learned counsel and

perused the record.

The authorisation of fair price shop of the petitioner

was cancelled by the DSO vide order dated 18.12.2015. The

petitioner preferred an appeal before the Collector. It was allowed

vice order dated 8.6.2016 and the order dated 18.12.2015 was

set aside with a direction to provide an opportunity of hearing to

the petitioner after supplying copy of the report dated 16.12.2015.

In pursuance to the aforesaid order, a show cause notice was

issued again along with copy of the report dated 16.12.2015. The

petitioner submitted reply vide Annexure-19. The reply aforesaid

is quoted hereunder for ready reference-

"VERNACULAR MATTER OMITTED"

The petitioner did not ask to supply any document

before filing of the reply. The report gives details of the default

and the irregularities. The petitioner wants to take benefit of his

own default now to say that documents were not supplied to him.

If the report was supplied and reference of certain documents was

existing, petitioner could have asked to furnish copy of those

documents before filing reply but he failed to do so. Based on the

reply and after aopportunity of hearing, DSO again passed an

order on 20.7.2016 cancelling authorisation of fair price shop. The

appeal and the revision thereupon were dismissed by a detailed

and speaking order. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid,

it cannot be said to be a case where order was passed by the DSO

without proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is more

so when at the first instance, appeal preferred by the petitioner

was allowed by the Collector with remand of the case and it was

remanded in reference to the report dated 16.12.2015, which was

supplied to the petitioner.

In view of the discussion made above, I do not find any

merit in this writ petition. Hence, it is dismissed.