URVISH RATILAL GANDHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is against the order passed by the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 78 of 1988. The appellant be rein has prayed in the Special Civil Application for issue of a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ to hold that the respondent No. 2-Collector has no power authority or jurisdiction to propound a Scheme of Exemption as per Annexure `C and `F collectively and for further order to quash the said administrative and extensive orders or directions. There is a further prayer in the Special Civil Application to the effect that necessary orders or direction should be issued to the respondents directing them to launch prosecution against the fair price ration shop owners as well as other persons who surrendered bogus ration cards under the propounded scheme of respondent No. 2-Collector as per Annexure C and F collectively. There is yet another prayer to the effect that a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ in the nature of mandamus should be issued directing the respondents to offer the benefit of propounded scheme to the appellant as per Annexures C and F collectively and the appellant be allowed to Zavail of the said Scheme.

(2.) The short facts of this case for the purpose of disposal of this Letters Patent Appeal are that in the City of Surat there were large amount of bogus ration cards which resulted in short supply of food grains and kerosene to the needy and deserving individuals. Mr. Gandhi the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant himself states in his arguments that nearly 40 0 bogus food grains ration cards and 25 0 kerosene ration cards have been seized by this method and the Collector was able to get at those bogus ration cards. The appellant is one of those who is involved in perpetrating such type of circulation and dealing in bogus ration cards as per the allegations and averments made in the prosecution that has been launched against him. Mr. Gandhi states that the said prosecution is still pending and as such it cannot be definitely stated that the appellant was a party. Whatever it may be there is a prosecution against him and the same is pending in respect of the circulation of such bogus ration cards. It is that person who has come forward with the present Special Civil Application for directing the 2nd respondent-Collector by the issue of a writ of mandamus to launch prosecution against all the fair price ration shop owners from whose possession or through whom the bogus ration cards have been surrendered. According to Mr. Gandhi there is no power under Secs. 3 4 or 5 of the Essential Commodities Act 1955 for the Collector to enter into a package deal for the purpose of getting at the bogus ration cards. This argument proceeds on a wrong assumption. The method and manner of investigating to get at such bogus ration cards that are in circulation cannot be interfered with and it is left to the tact and capacity of the individual administrator to adopt such means for the purpose of dealing with such culprits in the interests of the public The cheats who are indulging in such type of dealings can react only when some bait is given. That does not mean that the cheats are permitted or encouraged to perpetrate such offence in the society. The affidavit of the Collector clearly states that in the interests of administration he proposed such a scheme. The President of the Fair Price Shop Association of Surat City also requested the Collector and has stated that the bogus ration cards collected during house to house enquiry by fair price shop keepers will be surrendered and that the ration cards will be surrendered in the office of the Collector. The President had further requested that if such collection and surrender is made by the fair price shop keepers they should not be treated as responsible for the said ration cards. It is the further say of the Collector that he gave an assurance to all the dealers of fair price shop through newspapers that no action will be taken against the said fair price shop keepers who will surrender such ration cards. Since no evidence was found against the dealers of any of the fair price shops regarding involvement in preparing bogus ration cards no prosecution or complaint was made against them regarding the same. As far as the appellant is concerned there was evidence regarding direct involvement of the appellant according to the Collector and a complaint was filed against the appellant. He further states that on enquiry bogus ration cards were detected from the house to house enquiry carried out by the members of the Fair Price Shops Association on scrutiny of the ration cards register and the said ration cards were surrendered by them and the said entries were deleted from their cards register and as such there is no evidence directly either for connectiug these persons who surrendered these bogus cards or for holding them responsible in preparing the same. There is a further averment by the Collector to the effect that so far as the Zonal Officer and his staff are concerned they are facing departmental enquiry and as a matter of fact the Zonal Officer vas suspended and his staff was also transferred. The Collector being the head of the administration and since the District Supply Office comes under his jurisdiction has correctly taken step to check such type of bogus circulation of ration cards and wherever necessary it is evident from his affidavit-in-reply necessary prosecution has been launched Hence it is too much for the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant to state that there is no power for the Collector even to investigate for the purpose of finding out the case and as such the prosecution or any other action against the appellant has to be quashed. Further prayer that the Collector must irrespective of the evidence launch prosecution or take action against the fair price ration shop owners cannot also be countenanced since it is not for this person to say that action has to be taken in spite of the fact that the Collector has categorically stated that there is no evidence with regard to these fair price shop owners regarding their involvement in circulating such type of bogus ration cards. The relief granted in exercise of the powers of under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India is a discretionary relief and it is surprising that the appellant who himself is facing prosecution for circulating the bogus cards wants to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India just to save his skin and also to unnecessarily malign the Collector who has acted with responsibility and involvement in the public good.

(3.) There is absolutely no merit in any of the contentions raised by the appellant herein and accordingly this Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.