RATHOD CHEHARSINH MOHANJI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been directed against the order dated 02/04/2013 passed by respondent No. 1 herein Deputy Secretary, Government of Gujarat in Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, Gandhinagar by which, the appeal No. 24 of 2011 filed by the petitioner herein challenging the order dated 29/06/2011 passed by the Collector, Banaskantha at Palanpur, respondent No. 2 herein, was rejected.

(2.) FACTS in nutshell of the case of the petitioner are that the respondent No. 2 The Collector, Banaskantha herein had issued a Notification dated 02/01/2010 for opening the Fair Price Shops in rural area (Pandit Din Dayal Upadhyay Grahak Bhandar) (for brevity 'shops') for local educated unemployed/selfhelp groups at various Talukas of Banaskantha District, which includes Village: Kaprupur, Taluka: Bhabhar, to be allotted to the different categories of people as mentioned therein. Pursuant to the said Notification, the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 3 amongst others, applied for the same. The applications thus received, were verified by the Taluka Civil Supply Advisory Committee on 26/02/2010 and thereafter, by the Rural Vigilance Committee on 27/05/2010, after which, the Mamlatdar, Bhabhar, submitted the proposal to the respondent No. 2 herein The Collector, Banaskantha on merits, wherein, the petitioner stood at serial No. 3. Thereafter, the District Civil Supply Advisory Committee also discussed the proposal submitted by the Mamlatdar, as aforesaid, and also prepared the merit and accordingly, the respondent No. 2 herein, by order dated 07/06/2010, allotted the Fair Price Shop to respondent No. 3 herein Shri Maldhari Svasahay Juth, Village: Kaprupur, Taluka: Bhabhar, District: Banaskantha (for brevity 'Juth'). The said order was challenged by the petitioner before the respondent No. 1 herein by way of filing the Appeal No. 53 of 2010, which came to be partly allowed and order dated 07/06/2010 passed by the respondent No. 2 herein was quashed and set aside and the matter was remanded back to him for a fresh decision. The respondent No. 2 heard the matter on merits and eventually, by order dated 29/06/2011, confirmed his earlier decision dated 07/06/2010, allotting the shop to the respondent No. 3 herein. The said order was carried into appeal by the petitioner before the respondent No. 1 herein by way of filing the Appeal No. 24 of 2011. It is the case of the petitioner that without verifying the record and the Government Resolution in letter and spirit and the criteria set out in the Application Form itself, by common order dated 02/04/2013, the respondent No. 1 herein rejected the appeal of the petitioner, which is the subject matter of the present petition.

(3.) BY order dated 19/07/2013, this Court (Coram: Anant S. Dave, J.) has admitted the petition and also granted the interim relief in terms of para 8(C) of the petition by which the respondent No. 3 is restrained from running the said shop.