SCA/27801/2007 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 27801 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= HARGOVANBHAI KUBERBHAI JADAV - Petitioner(s) Versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR DILIP B RANA for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR SATYAM CHHAYA, ASSTT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3. MR RE VARIAVA for Respondent(s) : 4, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH Date : 11/02/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. D.B. Rana, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Satyam Chhaya, learned AGP for the respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. R.E. Variava, SCA/27801/2007 2/5 JUDGMENT learned counsel for the respondent no.4. 2. Rule. Mr. Satyam Chhaya, learned AGP for the respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. R.E. Variava, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 waive service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents. 3. The petitioner has prayed for appropriate writ, order or direction, invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 27th September, 2007 passed by the Joint Secretary, Food & Civil Supplies Department, as well as the order dated 3rd March, 2007 passed by the respondent no.2 with further direction to the authorities by a mandamus to grant fair price shop to the petitioner. 4. The parties have made detailed submissions and have drawn attention of this Court to various facts emerging from the orders under challenge. Certain undisputed facts are also pointed out by Mr. Chhaya, learned AGP. Mr. Rana, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Variava, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 in whose favour, the impugned orders are passed, have jointly submitted that without entering into the detailed discussions, this Court may remand the matter back to the Collector with appropriate directions to scrutinize the factual aspects discussed by the Joint Secretary at the time of passing of the order under challenge dated 27th September, 2007 and other facts that SCA/27801/2007 3/5 JUDGMENT may be placed by both these candidates who had applied in response to the advertisement published in daily newspaper of 14th August, 2006. The advertisement was published as the government was wanting to grant licenses for various fair price shops in various areas under Pandit Dindayal Upadhyay Grahak Bhandar Scheme floated by the government. Both the authorities are supposed to consider the various clauses of the Scheme and interse allegations between the rival claimants are that other one is gainfully employed. It is the say of the respondent no.4 that the petitioner is an agriculturist and he has some parcel of agricultural land in the joint name of his brother and mother etc. On the other hand, say of the petitioner is that the respondent no.4 who has been granted license under the impugned orders was already employed and was running auto rickshaw not only on the day on which advertisement was published, but the day on which the Collector was dealing with the applications received. So, the Collector, obviously has to consider various aspects. It would be in the fitness of things to direct the Collector to deal with all the applications received by him on merits afresh and after examining the details available before him and the facts that may be placed before him during the course of submissions, he shall pass order afresh. The controversy is qua fair price shop allotted to the respondent no.4 at village SCA/27801/2007 4/5 JUDGMENT Jesda, Taluka-Sami, District-Patan. 5. The Collector, therefore, is directed to deal with all the applications received on their own merits and in the background of the recommendations made by the respective Committees, that is, Taluka Committee and District Committee. 6. As the parties have invited this order, I have not discussed the facts placed before this Court in detail. The petition is therefore hereby allowed in the following terms:- [i] Impugned order dated 27th September, 2007 passed by the Joint Secretary, Food & Civil Supply Department as well as the order dated 3rd March, 2007 passed by the respondent no.2 are hereby quashed and set aside. [ii] The matter is remanded back to the Collector, District-Patan with a direction to deal with all applications received for grant of license at village Jesda, Taluka-Sami, District- Patan, keeping in mind all the details available on record as well as the details that may be placed before him by the parties. While doing so, the Collector shall issue a written notice to the petitioner as well as to the respondent no.4 and invite them to place their case before him. The Collector may also serve a notice to the other claimants that is, remaining four candidates, whose cases were considered by the SCA/27801/2007 5/5 JUDGMENT Committee and thereafter by the Collector. [iii] The Collector shall decide the entire issue at the earliest preferably within 60 days from the date of receipt of this Court. [iv] Pending these remanded proceedings, status quo as on today shall be maintained by the Collector to avoid hardship of the card holders and the public distribution system. If the decision is against the present respondent no.4, then, at least for 10 days, status quo shall continue so that respondent no.4 can approach appropriate forum and pray for interim orders. [v] If the Collector ultimately reaches to a conclusion that neither of six candidates deserve to be alloted fair price shop, then, it will be open for him to readvertise the intention of the government for allotment of fair price shop at village Jesda. The petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Direct service permitted. [C.K. BUCH, J.] pirzada/-