^-.'^^^^ H!GH COURT OF CHHATTSSGARH AT BSLASPUR D.B.: HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE SUNiL KUMAR SSNHA & HON'BLE Mr. JUSTiCE RADHE SHYAiVI SHARMA APPELLANT RESPOESEDENTS 1 WRSTAPPEAL N0,491/2011 Krishak Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh Chakapendra, Biock Navagarh, District Durg (C.G.) Through Jts President, Smt Shyam Bal Wd/o Late Shri Motiiai Banjare, aged about 65 years, R/o Viliage Chakapendra, Block Navagarh, District Durg (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Food and Civi! Supplies, Mantraiaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The ColEector, Durg, Dlstrict Durg (C.G.) The Sub Divisiona! Officer (R) Bemetara, District Durg (C.G.) WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2(1) OF THE HEGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH (APPEAL TO DIVSSION BENCH) ACT. 2006 Appearance: Mr. Sanjay Pate!, Counset forthe appellant. Mr. A.S.Kachhwaha, Dy. Advocate Generai for the State/respondents on advance copy. ORAL ORDER (31.10.2011) The foilowing order of the Court was passed by Sunl! Kumar Sinha, J^ Heard. Being aggrieved with the order dated 19.09.2011 passed in W.P.(C) No.5538/2011, by the learned Single Judge of thls Court, the appeilanVpetitioner has filed this appeal. ^•—^ ^i^ 1 ^ '"' y... <i. %,^^ ,,:y .^^ ~':^-.^.^' / ^ WRIT APPEAL N0.491/2011 rfe The appeilant/petitioner-Soclety was running a Fair Price Shop. On account of certaln irregularity, a show cause notice was issued to the appeElant on 18.08.2011 and the appeSlant was calied upon to file reply on 24.08.2011. St appears that even after service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant before the concerned authority on 24.08.2011, therefore, the concemed authority passed an order for cancellation of the Fair Price Shop of the appeilant. It was argued before the learned Singie Judge that appropriate opportunity of hearing was not provided to the appeilant. The learned Singie Judge referring to the provisions of Clause 16 of the Chhattisgarh Pubtic Distribution System (Controi) Order, 2004 held that a show cause notice was issued to the appellant, but no one appeared on behalf of the appellant on the date fixed for hearlng, therefore, there was no violation of the prlncipies of naturai justice. The learned Slngie Judge further heid that it was not pieaded by the appeliant-Society that prejudlce had been caused to the appellant-Society by not hearing It before passing the impugned order. The iearned Singie Judge, therefore, dismissed the writ petition. After going through the entire facts and circumstances of the case and considering the provislons of Clause 1,6 of the Chhattisgarh Pubiic Distribution System (Contro!) Order, 2004, we do not find any iliegality or irregularity in the impugned order passed by the iearned Single Judge, whereby, the writ petitlon fiied by the appellanVpetitioner vvas dismissed. The writ appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. shyna Sd/- Sunil KumarSinha Judge Sd/- R.S. Sharma Judge