REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

JASODA Appellant

V/S

STATE OF U.P. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

RAM UMESHWARI SUTHOO V. MEMBER,BOARD OF REVENUE ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
KALLU KHAN VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. MADAN GOPAL RUNGLA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. MADAN GOPAL RUNGLA [REFERRED TO]
SAGHIR AHMAD VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
FIRST ADDITIONAL INCOME TAX OFFICER MYSORE VS. H N S IYENGAR [REFERRED TO]
CALCUTTA GAS COMPANY PROPRIETARY LIMITED VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
GADDE VENKATESWARA RAO VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. RAJASAHEB CHA^DANMULL INDRAKUMAR PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
SATYANARAYANA SINHA VS. S LAL AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
SHANTI KUMAR R CANJI VS. HOME INSURANCE CO OF NEW YORK [REFERRED TO]
BAR COUNCIL OF MAHARASHTRA VS. M V DABHOLKAR [REFERRED TO]
JASBHAI MOTIBHAI DESAI VS. ROSHAN KUMAR HAJI BASHIR AHMED [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATE OF PUNJAB VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
UTKAL UNIVERSITY VS. NRUSINGHA CHARAN SARANGI [REFERRED TO]
DIRECTOR OF SETTLEMENTS A P VS. M R APPARAO [REFERRED TO]
LAXMINARAYAN R BHATTAD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
ANAND SHARADCHANDRA OKA VS. UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI [REFERRED TO]
TAMILNAD MERCANTILE BANK SHARE HOLDERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION VS. S C SEKAR [REFERRED TO]
A SUBASH BABU VS. STATE OF A P [REFERRED TO]
GOPI VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
SITA DEVI VS. COMMISSIONER LUCKNOW DVISION LUCKNOW [REFERRED TO]
AYAAUBKHAN NOORKHAN PATHAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
Sri Pal Jatav VS. State of U.P.& Ors. [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Shrawan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

(2.) By means of the present petition, petitioner has challenged the order bearing No. 705 [1] dated 5.12.2017 passed by the District Magistrate, Mahoba, District Mahoba (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) rejecting the petitioner's application/representation dated 7.11.2017 for opening of an additional fair price shop in Gram Panchyat, Jaitpur, District Mahoba. Prayer has also been made to direct the respondents to pass fresh order after taking a fresh report from Block-Jaitpur regarding present population and the number of units with further direction to the respondents that if the population as well as number of units are more than 20,000 at present, to permit the petitioner to distribute the food grains after adjusting the number of units of all fair price shop keepers.

(3.) The facts of the present case are that initially one fair price shop in Gram Panchyat Jaitpur was granted to Pratap Kumar which was cancelled by order dated 07.01.2017 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kulpahar, District Mahoba. Thereafter the said fair price shop was allotted to the petitioner by order dated 4.5.2017 (Annexure No.2) after passing of the resolution dated 24.4.2017 in the open meeting in petitioner's favour. The petitioner did not commit any irregularity in distribution of essential commodities and there were no complaints against her.

Click here to view full judgment.

JASODA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address