MOTILAL SAHA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who was the dealer of Fair Price Shop No. 65 at Jail Road, Agartala filed the present writ petition for a direction, inter alia, to the State respondents, particularly the respondent No. 3, the Officer-in-Charge, Agartala Rationing Authority to re-issue the licence for the aforesaid Fair Price shop which was surrendered by the petitioner earlier.

(2.) I have heard Mr. P. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. J. Majumder, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. None appears for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 despite proper service of notice upon them.

(3.) THE respondents by way of filing a counter affidavit denied all the allegations made by the petitioner and in the counter affidavit of the respondents, it is specifically contended that the petitioner left the station without making any alternative arrangement for supply of the ration to the card holders of Fair Price shop No. 65 in compliance with the order dated 9. 10. 02 (Annexure-C) i. e. the order by which the petitioner was asked to handover all the stock books, sale registers, card holders' register etc. including ration commodities, if any, lying with him after cent percent weighment in presence of Sri Abhijit Bhowmik, Inspector (Food) on cash payment. It is also contended that the petitioner was provided reasonable opportunity to state his case and he was also called for personal hearing vide registered letter No. F. 13 (8)-ARA/91/386-87 dated 20. 1. 03 (Annexure- R/1 to the counter affidavit ). But the same was returned undelivered from the Post Office since the petitioner refused to receive the same. Considering the irregularities committed by the petitioner and also taking note of surrender of his dealership, his dealership licence was cancelled with forfeiture of his security deposit for Fair Price shop No. 65 vide order dated 28. 2. 03 (Annexure- R/3 to the counter affidavit ). The same was again communicated to the petitioner by registered post which he also did not receive. On 28. 8. 06, the licence/dealership of the aforesaid Fair Price shop was awarded to another person, namely, Sri Ranjit Saha as per provisions of Tripura Food Grains (Distribution) Control Order, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'control Order') mainly to maintain uninterrupted operation of public distribution system in the greater interest of the card holders of the said Fair Price shop. It is also contended that though there is a provision for appeal in the Tripura Food Grains (Distribution) Control Amendment Order, but the petitioner did not approach the appellate authority before approaching this Court and that the petitioner approached this Court for re-issuance of his dealership licence after six years. On that count also, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.