SAVITHA Vs. COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR OF FOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Deputy Commissioner, Davanagere District, Davanagere, had issued a notification dated 16-2-1999 inviting applications from the persons interested for grant of authorisation for distribution of the essential commodities under the provisions of the PDS Control Order in kadaranayakanahalli, Davanagere District. Petitioner was one of the applicants. The Deputy Commissioner by his order dated 30-4-1999, has granted authorisation in favour of the petitioner for distribution of the essential commodities under the PDS Control Order. He has allotted nearly 269 cards to the petitioner.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the order made by the Deputy Commissioner, 4th respondent-Society has filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority. In the appeal the primary contention of the petitioner was that the society cannot be an aggrieved person and therefore the Appellate authority cannot entertain the appeal and decide the same one way or the other. The Commissioner who is the Appellate Authority by his order dated 26-7-1999, has allowed the appeal and has set aside the order made by the Deputy Commissioner in granting authorisation in favour of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this court.

(3.) APART from others, learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the Commissioner is not justified in coming to the conclusion that the 4th respondent-Society is an aggrieved person, aggrieved by the orders made by the Deputy Commissioner, dated 30-4-1999 and therefore, the appeal filed by it is not maintainable before him Learned Counsel submits that the reasoning of the Appellate Authority is not only erroneous but also opposed to the provisions of Clause 17 of the PDS Control order.