MOHANSINH NANSINH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition preferred by the Licensee of a Fair Price Shop against the Order dated 22nd February, 1996 made by the State Government [Deputy Secretary to the Government of Gujarat, Food & Civil Supplies Department] in Revision Application No. 129 of 1994. By the impugned order, the order of the lower authorities cancelling the license for the fair price shop given to the petitioner has been cancelled. The facts leading to the present petition are as under: In the year 1984, the petitioner was granted license under the Gujarat Essential Articles [Licensing, Control & Stock Declaration] Order, 1981 [hereinafter referred to as, Sthe Order ] for a fair price shop at village Dalwai Savli, Taluka Lunawada, District Panch Mahals.

(2.) On 20th April, 1985, the petitioner executed a power of attorney and by the said power of attorney, he appointed his brother Chauhan Ramsinh Nansinh to run the fair price shop and do the needful to run the said shop. On discovery of the said power of attorney by the concerned Mamlatdar, and based on the report made by the Mamlatdar, the District Supplies Officer, Godhara issued show cause notice dated 19th May, 1994 informing the petitioner that he had, in contravention of the terms and conditions of the license, transferred the fair price shop to his brother and to show cause why the license should not be cancelled. The said show cause notice was answered by the petitioner on 7th June, 1994. In the said answer, the petitioner contended that in the year 1985 he was sick. The said power of attorney was granted to his brother to man the shop during the sickness of the petitioner. Since his recovery, he had been managing the fair price shop. The District Supplies Officer, Godhara by order dated 6th September, 1994 did not accept the explanation given by the petitioner. He held that the power given on 20th April, 1985 had been continued until 1994. Thus, it cannot be said to be a temporary arrangement. It was held that the petitioner had acted in contravention of the terms of the license. The license was ordered to be cancelled and the deposit was ordered to be forfeited. The said order was confirmed in appeal by the Collector, Panch Mahals by his order dated 25th October, 1994, and by the State Government in Revision Application by the above referred order dated 22nd February, 1996. Therefore, the present petition.

(3.) Mr. Pandya has assailed the impugned order. He has relied upon the definition of the word SDealer occurring in the Order. He has submitted that, SDealer includes a representative, agent or a commission agent. The power of attorney granted by the petitioner to his brother, therefore, would not amount to transfer of business as held by the authorities below.