JOINT COLLECTOR KURNOOL Vs. A NEELIMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge holding that the suspension of the respondent Fair Price Shop Dealer would be for a maximum period of 90 days and if the enquiry initiated consequent on the suspension is not concluded within that period, the suspension shall stand automatically revoked. The learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies submits that in the mean time, the appeal carried by the respondent before the joint Collector against the order of suspension has been allowed holding both the charges framed against the dealer as not warranted and that the respondent is continuing as fair price shop dealer. The learned Government Pleader, however, expresses apprehension that if the order of the learned Single Judge is not clarified, it might be treated as precedent to hold in all case where enquiry is not completed within 90 days, the suspension to stand automatically revoked.

(2.) We have gone through the impunged judgment which is based upon the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s. Sukhwinder Pal Bipan Kumar vs. State of Punjab (1) AIR 1982 (S.C.), 1965. In that case, the prescribed form of licence contained the clause for the period of suspension to be maximum for 90 days. A perusal of the order of the learned Single Judge shows that in essence and substance what was meant by him is that the period of 90 days is a reasonable period to conclude the enquiry and the continuance of it beyond 90 days would be unreasonable and shall be, hence, taken as quashed. As we see it was in the nature of a direction to complete the enquiry within 90 days than laying down a general proposition of law that the maximum period of suspension could be only for 90 days. We agree with the view of the learned Single Judge that the order of suspension cannot be used as a pretext for-indefinite postponement of the operation of the fair price shop delership making it in effect cancellation of the dealership. An order of suspension, like every executive and administrative act, has to be founded upon fair play and lack of arbitrariness. The continuation of order of the suspension indefinitely is whole arbitrary and cannot be countenanced. But we must also rush to add that what is reasonable period of suspension will vary from case to case depending upon various factors, though more often than not, a period of 90 days should ordinarily be sufficient to conclude the enquiry.

(3.) With these observations, we make it clear that the observation of the learned Single Judge was in the context of the case before him only and shall not apply as a general rule. The appeal is disposed of with the observations. No costs.