RAGHUNATH SAHAI Vs. DISTRICT FOOD AND SUPPLIES CONTROLLER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question involved in this revision petition is whether the petitioner be permitted to continue with the Depot granted by the Food and Supplies Department for distribution of essential items during the pendency of the proceedings before the Civil Court for making the Award a rule of the Court.

(2.) IT is not disputed that the depot was cancelled on the ground of certain illegalities having been committed. The cancellation order was challenged in appeal before the departmental authority who permitted the depot to continue from 1985 onward till in 1989 when the Award was given against the petitioner cancelling the depot. The Award is under challenge before the trial Court and the objections have been filed. The trial Court first granted an injunction and later vacated the same inter alia holding that though the petitioner has prima facie case but the balance of convenience is not in favour of the petitioner. I have been taken through the impugned order by the counsel for the parties. Nothing has been pointed out how the balance of convenience is not in favour of the petitioner. The order is totally a non-speaking order. Mere saying that the balance of convenience is not in favour of the party is not sufficient particularly in case of a judicial order.

(3.) IN my considered view and in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in hand when the department itself permitted the petitioner to continue with the depot for about river years after the cancellation of the same, I do not find any ground not to permit the petitioner to continue with the same during the pendency of the proceedings before the Civil Court particularly when the Civil Court has came to the conclusion that the petitioner has prima facie case. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances, the impugned order is set-aside. The petitioner is permitted to continue with the depot during the pendency of the proceedings before the learned Sub Judge and respondents are restrained from interfering with the depot except in accordance with law. The respondents will be at liberty to cancel the depot or stop the supplies to depot forth-with if they find any irregularity committed by the petitioner during the pendency of the civil proceedings other than the one found by them resulting in cancellation of the depot. The proceedings be disposed of within a year.