KALLAPPA BALICHA CHAUGULE Vs. COLLECTOR KOLHAPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, is directed against the order dated the 9th February 1977, passed by the Government, i.e., the Honourable Minister of State (Food and Civil Supplies).

(2.) There is a chequered history of this matter and although the facts are unessential to determine the filial outcome, they will have to be stated to follow the course of events. The controversy relates to a licence to run a fair-price foodgrains shop situate in village Uma-lawd of Taluka Shirol, District Kolhapur. The said shop was run by the 4th respondent co-operative society by virtue of a licence granted by the Government under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. By his order dated the 5th February, 1974, the Tahsildar proposed to withdraw the licence granted to the society to run the said shop and allowed the petitioners herein who are freedom fighters to conduct the same temporarily for a period of two months. By his report dated the 27th March, 1974, he recommended the said step to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Karvir Division, Kolhapur, who was the competent authority at the relevant time. On the basis of the said report, the Sub-Divisional Officer by his order dated the 15th March 1974, cancelled the allotment of the said shop to the society and allotted the same to the petitioners. This step was, however, taken by the Sub-Divisional Officer without hearing the society. The society therefore preferred an appeal to the Divisional Commissioner, Pune, and the Divisional Commissioner by his order dated the 8th July, 1974, allowed the appeal of the society on the ground that the Sub-Divisional Officer had passed the said order without hearing the society. He therefore cancelled the order dated the 15th March, 1974, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer and directed the Collector (who was in the meanwhile invested with the relevant power) to restore the said shop to the society. The said order was, therefore, implemented, and the shop was allotted to the society. The Collector by his order dated the 16th August, 1974, in turn, directed the Tahsildar, Shirol, to implement the said order of the Divisional Commissioner.

(3.) In the meanwhile, the petitioners had preferred a writ petition in this Court against the said order dated the 8th July, 1974, passed by the Divisional Commissioner and in the said writ petition, by, consent, the Collector (who in the meanwhile had stepped in the shoes of the S. D. O.) was directed to hear both sides and pass his order according to law.