MAHILA BAHUDDESIYA SAHAKARI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 28.1.2012, whereby Sub -Divisional Office has removed the petitioner -society and attached the fair price shop with respondent No.4. The order dated 27.2.2013 of the SDO, whereby the petitioner's representation is rejected is also called in question.

(2.) SINGULAR ground of attack to this order is based on Clause 16 of M.P. Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2009 (for sort, the "Control Order"). It is contended that as per the said provision, only in cases of cancellation or suspension of authority letter, the shop can be attached to any nearby society. It is contended that the authority letter of the petitioner is neither suspended nor terminated and, therefore, the impugned order is bad in law. Reliance is placed on the order passed in WP No. 7981/2011 dated 7.12.2011, which point is affirmed by the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 782/2012.

(3.) IN the present case, by the impugned order dated 28.1.2012 the petitioner's fair price shop is removed and the shop in question is attached to the respondent No.4. Shri Bahirani has placed heavy reliance on the order passed by this Court in WP No. 7981/2011. I have perused the record of said writ petition. In the said case, the order dated 26.3.2011 is called in question. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under: - <IMG>JUDGEMENT_12_TLMPH0_2014.jpg</IMG> A bare perusal of the reproduced portion of order dated 26.3.2011 challenged in WP No. 7981/2011 shows that the shop of the petitioner was not cancelled whereas in the present case by Annexure P -2 the respondents have cancelled the shop of the petitioner.