MOHD ANNEES Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the writ petitioner. He is proprietor of M/s Pakija Fruit Company and is engaged in wholesale of fruits and vegetables. He was issued a licence on 14.12.2009 by the Secretary of the Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Niranjanpur, Dehradun (respondent No. 3). The licence is valid till 30.06.2016. It is stated that the appellant is carrying on business since December, 2009 and he is paying taxes and levy. The writ petition was initially filed seeking the following two prayers:

(2.) By the impugned Notice dated 01.10.2014, appellant was asked to remove the encroachment from the front of the canteen, from where he was doing the business.

(3.) The learned Single Judge, on the said prayers, dismissed the writ petition taking the view that the appellant was not able to establish any legal right. It is held that the Resolution dated 24.10.2013 relied on by the appellant, wherein it was resolved that one suitable place be allotted to the appellant with the prior approval / consent of the Managing Director of the Mandi Samiti, would not advance the case of the appellant, as the appellant was unable to point out as to when the alleged approval / consent was granted by the Managing Director; for which spot / place, such approval / consent was granted; and, after the approval, when the said place was allotted. Thereafter, the learned Single Judge proceeded to note that the appellant had absolutely no legal right to occupy the place of his choice without there being any allotment, consent or approval of the Managing Director. Hence the appeal.