XI—HC—78 mm HW,WW,W . w/ Qw; o/o WW(W) WWW. WWW Wwm mwn‘wm §;3I%1I311%2T Division Bench : Hon’ble Mr. V.K. Shrivas ava & Hon'ble Mr.Dhirendra Mi hra JJ 9-3-2007 Shri D. Shashidharan, counsei for the petitioners Shri Prashant Miahra, Addl. for the Advocate General State/respondents No.1 to: 4. Common order deiivered, signed and dated. Original order shail be kept in the W.P.No.5381 of 2006 a1 the same shall be; ker l connected wrjt petitions. l Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge record of 1d copy of >t in other Sd/- Dhirendra Mishr Judge ...o¢o¢o¢...oo.oo oo. ’\ P.T.O. a HIG'H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BlMSPUk DIVISION BENCH z Coram :- HQn’ble Shri Wjay Kumar Shrivastava &. Hon’ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra, JJ. Writ Petition No.5381 of 2006 Durg Sahkari Vipnan Samiti Maryadit, Durg & Othfers Versus State of Chhattisgarh 8. Others And Five Other Connected Writ Petitions Order for considergtion a ; Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava ’ Judge H , J on’bie Shri Dhrinendra Mishra Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge i Sd/- V.K.shriva5‘3"a HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BI SPUR DIVISION BENCH Coram :- Hon’ble Shri Vijay Kumar Shrivasmva & Hon'ble Shri Dhlrendra Mishra, JJ. Writ Petition No.5381 of 2006 Petitioners : Durg Sahkari Wpnan Samiti Maryadit. Durg. through M‘ President Yashwant Kumar Harmukh S/o Late Shri Kanhaiyalai Harmukh Aged about 66 years R/o District Duig (CG) Balod Vlpnan Sahakan Samiti Baiod Through m President Mohan Lal Patel S/o Late Shri Udayram Patel, Aged about 5$ years, R/o District Durg (CG). 1 Sahkari Vipnan Samiti Maryadit, Bemetara, Through its President '~ Manager Vijay Smgh Bhuwai S/o $hyam Singh Bhuwal Aged about 52 years R/o District Durg (CG) Kishan Sahkari \fipnan Samiti Maryadit, Gundardehi. through its Assistant Godown Keeper Doman Singh Markande S/o Parsanram Markande Aged about 50 years. R/e District Durg (CG) Vipnan Sankari Samiti Doncii Lohara Through its Manager Puranik Ram Sonwani S/o Bnj Lal Sonwani Aged about 38 years R/o District Durg (CG) Sahkari Vipnan Samiti Maryadrt Gurur, Through its Accounmnt Vsnuram Sahu, S/o Udayram Sahu Aged about 52 years, R/o District Durg (CG) Vipnan Sahakan Samiti Maryadit Dhamdha, Through its Assistant Manager. Surendra Singh Rajput S/o Shri Bahadur Singh Aged about 48 years R/o District Durg (CG) 8. Vipnan Sahakari Samiti. Patan. Through m Assistant Manager Beldhar Prasad Sahu. Slo Shri Sukhdev Ram Sahu. Aged about 32 years. Rlo District Dutg (QG). Adatsh Vipnan Sahamri ' Samiti Maryadit, Dondi, Through is Assistant Manager JB Singh Churendra, S/o Sampat Lal Churendra, Aged about 30 years, Rlo District Durg (CG). 10. Durg Jila Thok Upbhokta Bhandar Maryadit. Durg. Through ib Upper Division Clerk Rajendra‘ Kumar Tamrakar. S/o Horiiai Tamrakar. Aged about 45 years, R/o‘ District Durg (CG). ' 11. Bhiiai Thok Upbhokm Bhandar, Bhilai, Through its Godown lncharge Rajendra Prnsad Tiwari. S/o Chandra Shekhar Tiwan'. Aged about 46 years, R/o District Durg (CG). s Res ents i Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supplies, D.K.S. r Bhawan,Mantralaya,RaipUr (CG). _ . 2. Chhattisgam sate CiviiTSuppIies Corporation, Through Managing Director, Bal Aashram Parisar, Kachhari Chowk, Raipur ( C G ) . 3. Distriot Manager. Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited. District Durg (CG). l 4. Registrar: Cooperative l Societies. State of Chhattisgarh, District Raipur(CG). 1 5. The Coliedor, Durg (CG)i Present :- _,...——-——- Shri Kanak Tiwari, Sr. Advocato with Shri Matiri Siddique, counsel for the petitioners. 1 Shri Prashant Mishra, Addl. Advocate General for the State/respondents No.1 , 4 & 5. i Shri VR. Tiwari, counsel for responognts No 2 84 3. Writ Petition (PIL) No.6L61 of 2096 Petitioner: Domendra singh Bhedia, sic Late Khilendra Bhedia, Aged abbut 56 years, Former Chairman - Kéndriya Jua Sahkari Bank MaryaditJ Durg, R/o Balod. District Durg (CG). Versus x Respondents : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Throu h: the k’ Principal Secremry, Department of Food and Civii Supplies, p.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya. Raipur (¢G). \ 2. Chham'sgarh sate Civil sqppues Corporation. Through Managing Director, Bai Aashram Ponsar. 3. District Manager, Chhattisga ’Smte Civil Suppiies Corporation Li ited. Durg. District Ding (CG). ‘ 4. Conector (Food and~cwn supianes), Durg, District Durg (CG). l Present :- Shri Manindra Shrivastava. Sr. Advocate with Shri Arinrito Das, counsel for the petitioner. i Shri Prashant Mishra.,Addi. Advocate General f ‘ the State/respondents No.1 & 4. Kachhari Chowk. Ralpur (CG).l I i i shri v.R. Tiwari. counser for respondene No.2 & 3. Writ Petition No.2275 of 2006 Petitioners' . Durg Marketing Cooperative iety Ltd.. Durg, A Cooperative S iety registered under the provisi of the M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Soc eties Act, 1960 vide registration No 529, through Chairman Yashwant K mar Harmukh, Aged about 65 ye Slo Late Shri K.L. Harmukh, Rlo Dhamdha Naka. District Durg ( G). 2. Dhamdha Marketing Coope tive Society Ltd.. Dhamdha. Cooperative Society regis red under the provisions of the M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Societies I Act, 1960 vide [gamete 1 o a . w .;-Wm.,Mw.-w,_..: A.“ No.DR/DRGI5.1, through Chairman Baburam Chandd. Aged about R/o Main Road. Dhamdha. Distri Durg (CG). 3. Gurur Marketing Cooperatiye Society Ltd., Gurur. A Cooperative Socieiy registered under ti'ire provisions of the M.P.(C.G;) years, 51o Late Shri DR. Chand L' Cooperative Societies Act, 1 vide registration No.DR/DRG/ , through mshnu Ram Sahu, Ag about 52 years. S/o Late Shri U.‘ . Sahu, R/o Gurur Marketing Society. District Durg (CG). j , e I 4. Balod Marketing Coopemtiye Society Ltd., Balod. A Cooperattye Society registered under the provisions of the M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Societies Act. 1 vide registration No.631. throu h Manager UR. Sahu, Aged about years, S/o Shri Gajadhar R m Sahu, R/o Balod, DistrictDurg (C ). 5. Dondi Lohara, Marketi g Cooperative Society Limited, A Cooperative Society register under the provisions of e M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Soci s Act; 1960 vide registration No.07, through Manager PR. Sonwa’ni. Aged about 38 years, Slo Shri Briiiai Sonwani, Vipnan Sahkari Se iti. Dondi Lohara, District Durg (CG). 6. Cooperative Marketing Society Manendragarh. District Koriya. Cooperative Society regist under the prpvisions of M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Societies ESP/02, through Manager Prak sh Kumar Sinha, Aged about 53 ye rs. S/o Late Shri Laxmi Prasad. $0 Act, 1960 vide registration NoER- Purani Basti, Manendragarh, Dist ict Korea (CG). Versus Respondents : 'i. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: e ‘ Secretary, Department of Food and Ciyii Suppiies, D.K.S. Bhaw‘ian, Mantraiaya. Raipur LCGL L " L e 2. The Collector, Durg (CG). 3. The Sub Divisional Omcgr, ‘ Manendragarh, District Koriya (Cg). 4. The Food OfHcer. Distnct Koriya (CG) a Present :- Shri Kanak Tiwan or Advocate with Shn Matin Slddlque counsel for the petitioners \ Shn Prashant Mishra. Add! Advocate General for sate/respondents No 1 to 4 Writ Petition No.6530 of 2006 Petitioners: 1. Paralkot Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd.. Though : Subho‘sh Sarkar S/o Late Shri Shaiio‘sh Sarkar, Aged about 52 years Member of Paralkot Sahkan Vipnan Sanstha Maryadlt Pakhanlore, Kanker, District Kanker (CG). \ 2. Nam Gopal Biswas, S/o Shri Sharad Biswas. Aged about 45 years, Working as Saiesman in the Paraikot Sahkari Vpnan Sanstha Maryadit Pakhanjore Kanker District Kanker (CG). E Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through ithe Secretary, Department of Food and ‘ CMI Suppiies D KS BhaWan Mantraiaya, Raipur (CG) 2. The Coilector,DistrictKanker(C ). 3. The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), .Pakhanjur. DI nct Kanker(CG). 4. The Food Officer, District Ka ker (CG). Present :- Shri Kanak Tiwari. Sr. Advocate with Shri Matin Siddi [u'e. th Shn Prashant Mishra. Addi Advocate General for State/respondents No 1 to 4 Respondents : counsel for the petitioners Petitioner : Respondents : », l 6 T l Writ Petition No.5281 of 2006 Maryadlt Sarangarh Di nct Through Is Manager Shali ram Patel S/o Goverdhan Patel Raigarh (CG) about 30 years, lage Dharmabhata, Post Gudheli ahsil Sarangarh. District Raigarh (CG Sarangarh Sahkan \fupnan Simiti Versus 1. sate of Chhattisgarh Throug the Pnncipal Secretary, Departm nt of Food and CIVII Supplies. DKS Bhawan Mantralaya. Ralpur (C ) Chhattisgarh State CIVII Supphes Corporatuon Through Managing Director Bal Aashram Pansar Kachharl Chowk Ralpur (CG) ‘ D’stnct Manager. Chhamsgarq State CM! Dustnct Supplies Ralgarh Corporation (CG) LI F Ited Comparative Soqieties State of Chhamsgarh District r Registrar, Raipur (CG). I Present :- Petitioner ; Shri Kanak Tiwari. Sr: Advocate wfth Shri Mah'n Sfdwque, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Prashant Mishra. Addl. Advocate General for the State/respondents No.1. 4 & 5. Shri V.R. Tiwari, counsel for respondenis No.2 8‘3 4 writ Pegmon M5265 or ands ’ Sahakari Bhandar Marya No 22 Sunder Nagar, Ca Through Manager Laxmi arayan Agrawal S/o Shn Ram Kumar Indira Chowk Supela. Bhllal District Durg (CG) Sunder Prathmik U bhokm W rd Bhlial District Durg (CG) Agrawai Aged about 30 ye rs, 5. The Collector. Raigarh (CG). ‘ Versus i Respondents : 1. sate of Chhattisgarh, Throu‘gh: the Principal Secretary. Department of Food and Civil Supplies,iD.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya. Raipur (CG). 2. Chhattisgarh State Civil Slupplies Corporation. Through Ménaglng Director, Bal Aashram Parisar, Kachhari Chowk, Raipur (CG). l 3. District Maqager, ohhattisgarih Slate \ l CIVil Supplies Corporation liirplted, District Durg (CG). 4. Registrar. Co-operative Societies sate of Chhattisgarh, 'iDistrici Raipur (CG). i 5. The Collector, Durg, District Durg (CG). Present:- Shri Parag Kotecha, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Prashant Mishra, Addl. Advocate General fo‘r he State/respondents No.1, 4 & 5. i l l i i i l i Shri V.R. Tiwari, counsel for respondents No.2 & 3. ORDER l (Delivered on E) w March, 2007) ' ,umar The following order of the Court was del'wered by Wjay Shrivastava, J. All these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution o lndia relate to challenge the validity of policy decision for transportation f food grains to fair price shops which abstains marketingsooieties or con umer stores to carry both the works together of lead agency and fair price shops. Constitutional validity of imposition of condition whereby m lmum limit of three fair price shops has been incorporated in Public Distrl ution System (Control) Order, 2004 (for short "Order 2004") for allotm nt of shops to various agencies. issuance of public notice inviting tend r3 by the State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.. for transportatoin of food grains, *e t and vires of clause 9(1)(2)(3)(4) of the Order, 2004 as substitug‘fd vide notimation dated 21-3-2006. Having common questions for dec ion a" these petitions. are taken together, and are being disposed of by mis common order. 2) The Essential Commodities Act. 1955 (for short, “the Act, 1955") has been enacted by the Union of indie with the object of e uitabie distribution and supply of essential commodities to the public at la ge. On being delegated the State is also competent to enact such stamt ‘orders under Section 3 of the Act. 1955 for attaining me avowed purpose of the ‘Act. 1955 including distribution of essential commodities to the rati n card holders of public at large through fair price shops. For the ti time. erstwhile State of MP. enacted MP. Foodstuffs Distribution ( ntrol) Order. 1960 (for short. “order 1960) under which Govemment fa r price shops were established to run by‘appointment of retailers. in e year 1981 State of MP. framed a scheme known as M.P. (Foodstuff ) Civil Supply Public Distribution $cheme 1981 (for shod, “Scheme 1981) whereby aliowed preference in allotment of fair price sh ps to Co—operative Societies. in order to achieve the objectives. the R strar Co-operative Seeietres M P Vlde circular/order dated 02/05/198 f'xed criteria of Co-operative Societies who would be eligible to run the fa r price shops and thereby authorized Primary Credit Co-operative Socleti their branches, Large Aadimjatl Multipurpose Co-operative etles (LAMPS), Marketing Co-operative Societies and their branch Wholesale Consumer Co-operative Societies and their b nches Pursuant to it fair price shops were Withdrawn from the pnvate ind iduals and allotted to thesengocieties/‘ 3) Pursuant to Schema. 1981, the Registrar, Co-operatjve Soc es, issued a wall considered circular No 6152/4736/29/2/81 ated' 12-08-1981 and started a new scheme of appomting the lead sqclety which society would underiake the ask of receivmg essential commodities at par and on behalf of the fair price shops and wouid'further store and supply such oommoditles to the fair price shops, Primsry Co-ope ‘ve \ Marketing Societies were selected and to promote their work they re accorded financial assishnce Some of the Primary Co-operadve C Societies were also appornted as lead soorety to perform the said wprk The secreties authorized with work of lead agency continued their rk unrnterruptediy Since long. 4') in the year 2001 another scheme called as Chhattisgarh P ic u l 10 further dimcted that only those out of other Co-opemtive Societies can be allotted fair price shops under the Order 2004 which am permmed under the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, “the I'ct. 1960") or Chhattisgarh Swayatm Sahakarita Adhiniyam. 1999. to run e fair price shops, but the State vide amendment did not rectify the def in toto, on the other hand, imposed a ceiling of maximum of three sho to be allotted to any authorized agency. 6) On 08/11/2005 a meeting under the Chairman‘ship of Secre ry; Department of Food & Civil Suppiies. was convened :whereln lt mlas deliberated that where all kinde of institutions would fail including 'he Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation (for short, re Corporation"). then such lead agencies' work may be got executed by e Marketing Co-operative Societies and by no other societies. Eursuantt it V l and amendment brought in Control Order, 2004, the authorities start d asking the Marketing Societies who are canying both the works i.e.. le \ agency work as well as fair price shop to choose either of mom and al started asking to select oniy mree fair price shops. if they have more th n that also Government and authorities issued circular, letter and order in consonance with policy and amended provisions. 7) Feeling aggrieved with the amendment incorporated, vi e notification dated 21/03/2006 whereb Prlm Societies have been allowed to continue running the telr price shops a d Primary Agriculture Credit Societies have been authorized as agonciesto run fair price shops, the ceiling of maximum of three fair price shops policy decision taken by the State which curtailed the lead agency work of Marketing Society and to compel them to opt either to do the work of le d agency or to do the work of fair price shop, validity of raiiwthe e” a j rules/directions and amendment itself have been questioned. with a furthet relief that su'mble direction be issued to respondent/State not to formulate any policy with regard to Public Distribution System or essential commodities for purposes of any statutory/order made or otherwise contrary to judicial sanction and time tested policy of the State tol deploy the services of the Cwperatlve Societies as lead societies. 8) Respondents opposed the petition. inter alia, on the ground that the Sute Government is the sole depository for framing policies in public interest for proper and effective distribution of essential commoditi s to the fair price shops so that it may ultimately reach to the hands of rsons entitled for it. Shte is also empowered and authorized to regula is own l policy and to make addition/alteration and also to completely chainge the ‘ policy for the above stated purpose and object. The policy deoisi unless is absurd or is violative of any constitutional provision or is whollyi proper and irrational to the extent that the policy cannot be interfered wi by the Courts. r 9) Marketing societies have been chosen to work as lead ag cy only by executive orders because of their proximity to the godowns n which essential commodities are stored. They have no legal right to de any essential commodities meant for distribution through fair pric shops. sate cannot be directed not to frame public policy in a particular manner. lt is the duty of the State Government to make the essential co odities timely available in the fair price shops for distribution to ra on card holders. but the involvement of multiple agencies for lifting the fo d grains from Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Centers to F ir Price Shops creates unnecessary delay in supply of foodgrains to lr price shops for that reason State decided to provide foedqdrains to airipiiceii 12 shop through door step delivery by Chhattisgarh sate Civil Supplies Corporation and accordingly issued necessary instructions. The implemenmtion of public distribution system needs constant monimring and desired changes, if necessary, based upon the experience of the Siate Govemment to ensure timeiy suppry of foodgrains to the fair price shops for onwards distribution to the ration card holders. Public distribution system requires change in policy sometimes by way of necessity and sometimes for experiment to evolve a better mechanism to achieve the object. Thus to achieve excellence in implemenmdon of i Public Distribution System (for short “PDS") continuous reforms is needed. therefore. no individual or society can claim any fundamental or stTutory rightto continue to in the PDS and its allied sphere. 10) By adopting door step delivery system the Govemment ls ng to eliminate one lntennediary and to hand over the work carried out b load agencies to a Govemment owned smtutory Corporation who shlall be solely responsible for distribution of essential commodities to the Fai price shops without requiring the shopkeepers to make payment of the v lue of the articles in advance. This can only be done when a Gove ment agency is made responsible for delivery. Earlier to 1985 in abse of nodal agencies, cooperative societies were appointed as lead agenolies for distribution under PDS. The supply of foodgrains. by Chhaitisga State Civil Supplies Corporation to fair price shops under door step d livery system will reduce the involvement of multiple agencies and ensu time supply of PDS commodities to fair price shops. Timely avalla iiity of foodgrains for public distribution at Fair price shops level is thp best guarantee against its diversion. r 11) ‘ The Govemment of lndia is regulariy insisting the Shtes to take pro-active steps to curb leakages and diversion of foodgrains m nt for PDS. Vida letter dated 4-10—2006 Govemment of India has ins cted all the State Governmens to ensure door step delivery of foodgrain to fair price shops and to avoid diversion or any malpractices. For streamlining the PDS. Govemment of India instructed that the number of intermediaries should be kept to the minimum. Therefore. the State Government has decided to remove the multiple agencies involved for transportation of , i l foodgrains to fair prices shops. Door step delivery of foodgraine)will be carried out by the Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporatio . For online tracking the movement of vehicles engaged in the transpo tion of PDS foodgrains Global Positioning System (for short “GPS") devici will be used. Normally delay in supply of foodgrains occurs due to late payment. ‘ t of the amount of foodgrains by the Fair Price Shopsto the Chha 'sgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation. To overcome this proble l. State Government has decided to supply foodgrains to fair price shops in by the advance by the Corporation without waiting for the payment shopkeepers. The smte Govemment has right to select and app int any agency as lead agency for timely and smoothiy supply of foodgrain to fair ‘ price shops as an administrative and policy decision. theref re, the marketing societies or other societies cannot claim for lead agen y work as their fundamental rights. The amendment of Order; 2004 issu d vide notihcation dated 21-3-2006 is within the legislative competenc of the e Govemment of Chhauisgarh. The State Govemment has powerLto limit the maximum number of three fair price shops. which can be all tted to any agency, mentioned in the Order. 2004. 12) Petitioners contentian is that the decision taken in a meeting is not a delegated legislation and cannot be termed as a decision of the #tate in i public policy. Even otherwise the said decision does not fall wi in the limb of public policy. In order to support their contention. they relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon’bie the Supreme Court in the matter of Ashok Lanka and another vs. Rishi Dixit and others, repel ed in (2005) 5 SCC 598. Para 55 of the judgment reads as below: l "55. The Commissioner of Excise issued a circuia Ietter dated 14-2-2005 which power evidently he did‘ not possess in terms of Section 7 of the Act. Althoughl the State may delegate its power to thei Commissioner of Excise. such a delegation cannot bei made in relation. to the matters contained in the rule- making poWer of the State. The matters which are. therefore, outside the purview of the Rules only could be the subject-matter of delegation in favour of the Commissioner of Excise. The Commissioner o Excise is a statutory authority. He is ‘bound to exercise his poWer only wid1in the four comers of the; Act or the Rules framed thefeunder and not dehors the same.‘ He further relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon'Ale the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Rajasthan and others vs. Basant Nahata, reported in (2005) 12 SOC 77. Para 66 of the ju gment 4 reads as below: '66. The contention raised to the effect that this Court would not interfere with the policy decision is again devoid of any merit. A legislative policy must conform to the provisions of the constitutional mandates Even otherwise a policy decision can be subjected'to judicial review. (See Cellular Operators Assn. international of lndra Ltd. v: v Securities Union of & lndra Exchange and Board Clanant ofi 13) Leamed counsel for the petitioner further contended that cilrcular issued by administrative authorities against the operation of the s tutory India)“ rules has no force and therefore. the circular issued by the authorities herein asking the marketing societies to optgithggf the M9,ibsihi$g3i, i A Le. Iead agency or fair price shop and to select three fair price shops is illegal. Ha relied on the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court ln the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Jagannath Achyut Karandikar, reported ln 1989 Supp (1) SCC 393, Para 7 ls quoted below: "7. The aforesaid Rules expressly provided powerlo the Govemment to grant more chancee for passihg the cases. examination Under the in any 1955 individual Rules, case the or Governme in class ‘of t preserved power to dispense with, or relax the requirements of any rule regulating “the oonditions bf service of Govemment servanta; or of any class thereof'. in the exercise of this power, e Govemment could dispense with or relax ' e operation of any rule, if it causes undue hardships n any particular case. It is needless to state that thrs power includes the power to relax the conditions prescribed for promotion since promotion ls ia condition of service. There is no restriction as to me exercise of the power or discretion. The High Courit. however, has observed that the scope of this power has been constrained by the circular dated 15-1-1 . The circular states that the 1955 Rules permittin relaxation cannot be utilized to relax the rules whic, regulate conditions of service. It further sates that this scope of the Rules should be limited only to matters relating to traveling allowance, leave. etc. But this appears to be an exercise in vain. The circular is arr executive instruction whereas the 1955 Rules a statutory since framed under the proviso to Article 3 of the Constitution. The Govemment could not hav restricted the operation of the statutory rules by issuing the executive instruction. The executive , instruction may supplement but not supplant the statutory rules. The High Court was ln error in ignoring this well—accepted principle." 14) Learned counsel for the petitioners canvassing preferential criteria in favour of co-operative societies contended~that for lead Lgency business societies are entitled for preference and also societies ca not be restricted to opt retaining maximum number of three shops and pl reliance upon the decision of Hon'bie the Supreme Court in the Madhya Pradesh Ration Vikreta Sangh Society and others v of Madhya Predesh and another. reported inj1981i§ §QQ Court held thus