GOPAL DAS KAPOOR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, an appointee for sale of Government foodgrains, challenges the legality of an order passed by the District Supply Officer, suspending his appointment as an " authorised retail distributor " by means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) IN exercise of the powers conferred by the provisions contained in Section 3 read with Section 5 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the State Government enforced the U. P. Foodgrains and other Essential Articles Distribution Order, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the distribution order of 1977). Clause 2 (b) of the Distribution Order of 1977 reads thus 5- ' Authorised retail distributor " means a person appointed as ' agent (Retail) by the District Magistrate, City Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate for sale of Government foodgrains and other essential articles. "

(3.) FOUR submissions have been made on behalf of the petitioner. They are : (1) Neither the terms of the Distribution Order of 1977 nor the terms of the agreement confer any power in any authority to suspend the authorisation given in clause 2 (b) of the Control Order of 1977. (2) The appointment having been made by the District Magistrate, no other officer except him could pass the impugned order of suspension. (3) In any case, the District Supply Officer could not exercise the powers of the District Magistrate as he had not been authorised in writing by the District Magistrate to do so; and (4) the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of showing cause before the impugned order was passed.