RUKMANI DEVI CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Hari Mohan, husband of the petitioner in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11373/2020, present in person, submits that the licence of fair price shop which was in the name of his wife, has been illegally cancelled by the respondent vide order dtd. 7/9/2020. It is also submitted that earlier the licence was suspended vide order dtd. 23/1/2020, against which he preferred Civil Writ Petition No.7827/2020, wherein the High Court passed an interim order dtd. 30/7/2020, staying the operation of suspension of licence of fair price shop. During pendency of the writ petition and staying the operation of the suspension order, the respondent could not cancell the fair price shop licence.

(2.) Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that the order dtd. 7/9/2020, which is under challenge in the present writ petition is an appealable order. Clause 22 of the Rajasthan Foodgrains and Other Essential Articles (Regulation of Distribution) Order, 1976 (for short 'Order of 1976') provides for an appeal before the District Collector against the order of cancellation of fair price shop and in view of that the petitioner has alternative efficacious and statutory remedy of appeal before the District Collector. Therefore the writ petition is not maintainable.

(3.) It is well settled law that when a statutory alternative remedy is available to a person against the order, no interference could be made in the said order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, except in a case where the order under challenge is without jurisdiction of the authority passing the order. In the present case, there is no such argument of petitioner.