JAVED AHMAD Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court impugning the Government Order No. 48-FCS&CA of 2017 dated 09.03.2017, whereby Fair Price Shop License issued in favour of Sindh Raj Katoch s/o Bodh Raj Katoch for Sale Centre Jawari Ramban was cancelled and the same was directed to be issued in favour of the respondent No. 5.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner while challenging the aforesaid allotment submitted that before allotment thereof to the respondent No. 5, no advertisement was issued. Applications were not invited from the eligible persons and in a hush hush manner, the allotment was made in favour of respondent No. 5 as he was a political favourite person. It was only for the reason that his name was recommended by the M.L.A. concerned. He further submitted that before allotment of the Fair Price Shop in favour of respondent No. 5, vide Government Order dated 04.08.2016, in supersession of all previous guidelines, fresh guidelines were issued for allotment of Fair Price Shops. However, the same were violated. The respondent No. 5 was not even eligible for allotment as the qualification required was minimum matriculation and not more than 10+2. The application did not mention any date on the application submitted by him. Though the guidelines did not provide for any recommendation by the M.L.A/ M.L.C., however, a column in the application provided for the same. The process of allotment followed by the official respondents did not inspire confidence as fair opportunity was not afforded to all eligible candidates. The allotment deserves to be quashed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State submitted that the procedure as prescribed did not provide for issuance of any advertisement. Application was submitted by the respondent No. 5. The M.L.A/M.L.C of the area and the Sarpanch are the best persons who can recommend a candidate. This was the system being followed earlier. However, now it stands changed with the new guidelines. There is no allegation of mala fide. Even the petitioner is not eligible. New procedure was notified in March 2018.