RAJABHAI LEELABHAI MARU Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD. The petitioner is invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by way of the present petition. The petitioner has prayed for the following main reliefs in the form of appropriate writ, order or direction:-

(2.) GRIEVANCE of the petitioner is that he was given license to run fair price shop. However, on account of certain technical irregularities, same was cancelled and the authorities refused to entertain the appeal and the revision filed by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner was compelled to approach this Court by way of Special Civil Application No. 7061 of 1998. Say of the petitioner was to be considered if he applied for license sympathetically by the authorities. Thereafter, in the month of December, 1998, the Taluka Advisory Committee resolved to grant license for fair price shop of Manavadar to the petitioner, being most eligible candidate available. However, the respondent no. 2 did not take a decision for two years and suddenly, it cancelled the decision taken by the Taluka Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection Advisory Committee. The petitioner, therefore, filed second petition being Special Civil Application No. 123 of 2001 challenging the said decision. This Court, vide, order dated 21st April, 2001 allowed the petition [coram: Kundan Singh, J. ] and directed the authorities to take a final decision on the basis of the recommendations made by the Taluka Committee. The District Civil Supplies Committee recommended the name of the petitioner. However, the petitioner was not granted license turning down the recommendation made by the Committee and therefore, the present petition is filed.

(3.) DURING the course of the submissions, Ms. D. S. Pandit, learned AGP for the respondents has pointed out that from the record which is made available to her by the officer present in the Court, it appears that the petitioner is at present working as Clerk in the office of the Taluka Panchayat at Manavadar. So, perhaps, the petitioner may not have interest in continuing with the petition and on this ground alone, the petition can be dismissed.