PARAS MAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition assailing the order dated 14.9.2001 (Annex.4) passed by the Addl. Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplied Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur in Appeal No. 6/2001 whereby the learned Addl. Commissioner has accepted the appeal filed by the respondent No. 5 and has set aside the order dated 12.1.2001 issued by the Collector (Civil Supplies) Chittorgarh appointing the petitioner as fair price shopkeeper for Gram Panchayat Karsana. Thesil Dungla, District Chittorgarh.

(2.) Brief facts relevant for determination of the questions involved in this writ petition are that the Collector (Civil Supplies) Chitorgarh invited applications for authorisation of fair price shopkeeper for supplies of food grains and other essential articles in Gram Panchayat, Karsana, Tehsil Dungla. In all six applications were received including that of the petitioner and the respondent No. 5. On the recommendation of the Allotment Advisory Committee, an order dated 12.1.2001 (Annex.2) was made for issuance of authorisation to the petitioner Parasmal as fair price shopkeeper; and the petitioner deposited an amount of Rs. 500/- as security on 23.1.2001 (Annex.3). The respondent No. 5 submitted an appeal before the Addl. Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur questioning the order made in favour of the petitioner as being illegal and improper for the reasons (a) that the petitioner was engaged in his cloths and grocery business and has also obtained PCO as an unemployed person; (b) that the petitioner was the brother of Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch of the Panchayat who were the members of Allotment Advisory Committee and made the recommendation on favoritism; (c) that the petitioner was facing trial in criminal cases and in one of the cases, he had been convicted under Sections 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act and, therefore, he was not of good moral character and could not have been appointed as fair price shopkeeper.

(3.) It appears that in response to the appeal so filed by the respondent No.5, the petitioner submitted reply alleging that the appellant Bhanwarlal was on inimical terms with him and was of quarrelsome nature and an FIR No. 143/1992 dated 24.11.1992 was registered against him at Police Station, Dungla for offences under Sections 323, 324, 341 Indian Penal Code; another FIR No. 227/1994 and yet another FIR No. 235/2000 in the same Police Station, Dungla were referred and it was pointed out that various other cases were pending against the appellant in different courts. The petitioner submitted that he was rightly authorised as fair price shopkeeper and the complaint against him was baseless. It appears that on the part of the District Supply Officer and the Collector, Chittorgarh also, the appeal was opposed with the submissions that the petitioner was appointed on the basis of the recommendations of Allotment Advisory Committee in accordance with law.