LAWS(CAL)-2024-8-28

FERDOWSI BISWAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Decided On August 16, 2024
Ferdowsi Biswas Appellant
V/S
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for cancellation of appointment of respondent no.10 as M.R. Dealer and for issuance of FPS Dealership licence in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) The brief fact of the petitioner's case is that the petitioner and the respondent no.10 amongst others were the applicants in respect of vacancy notification being Memo No. 592/SCFS/BER/2022 dtd. 11/5/2022 declaring vacancy in respect of engagement of Fair Price Shop dealer for the location Mahammadpur covering Chadipur village, Mahammadpur. Upon such application being made, pursuant to the vacancy notification, inspection was conducted and the petitioner was found to be most suitable. However, later on, the petitioner came to learn that the respondent no.10, Jahangir Hossain, has been selected as FPS Dealer against such vacancy notification. The petitioner on 24/7/2023 approached the District Magistrate, Murshidabad by a representation requesting him to take steps for inquiring into the matter of such selection of respondent no.10. On 26/7/2023, another representation was also made before the Sub-Divisional Controller (Food and Supplies), Berhampore Sadar. Since the representations made by the petitioner challenging such appointment of respondent no.10 was not considered, the petitioner filed the present writ petition for cancellation of appointment of respondent no.10 as FPS Dealer and issuance of licence in her favour.

(3.) Despite service of notice, respondent no.10 did not appear at the first instance. In compliance to order dtd. 13/10/2023, the State filed its report on 2/1/2024 and exception was filed on 9/1/2024 by the petitioner. On 24/1/2024, supplementary affidavit was filed by the State-respondent. Thereafter the matter was taken up for hearing. During the course of hearing, learned advocate representing respondent no.10 intervened to make his oral submission opposing the prayers made by the petitioner in the writ petition.