SUHASH CHANDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per the case of the petitioner, he was running a wholesale fruit shop at Old Vegetable Market, Ambala City since 1991 against licence No.978 dated 02.02.1991 issued by the Market Committee, Ambala City. Said licence was renewed from time to time. Applications were invited on Form-A from old licensees of Vegetable Market, Ambala City for allotment of plot/shop in New Vegetable Market at Ambala City vide letter dated 01.03.2014. Petitioner also moved application and attached all the documentary proofs considering himself to be eligible. However, the claim of the petitioner was not considered and he was informed that he did not attach any proof of ownership/rent and could not prove that he was either owner or tenant of the shop. Accordingly, the application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 20.06.2014 on the ground that in shop No.22, one other firm namely M/s Oberoi Food Company was also carrying out business and a plot was already allotted to it. Aggrieved by the order of rejection of application dated 20.06.2014, the petitioner filed appeal before the Secretary, Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board, Panchkula, who was delegated powers by the Chief Administrator, Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board (respondent No.2), which was dismissed vide order dated 08.12.2017. Thereafter, the petitioner filed revision before the Additional Chief Secretary, Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department, Haryana (respondent No.l), which was also dismissed vide order dated 20.11.2018.

(2.) All the three orders i.e. order of rejection dated 20.06.2014 (Annexure P-6), order passed in appeal dated 08.12.2017 (Annexure P-8) as well as the order passed by the revisional authority dated 20.11.2018 (Annexure P-9) are under challenge in the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that claim of the petitioner has been rejected without assigning any reason and some of the similarly situated persons have been allotted shop/plot. Petitioner was working since 1991 as a wholesale fruit seller and from a single shop various persons can carry out business but still his claim has been rejected.