CW-12278/09 (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12278/2009 Kanahiya Lal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. & S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12276/2009 Kanahiya Lal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. & S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12277/2009 Kanahiya Lal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. & S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12279/2009 Kanahiya Lal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Date of Order :: 29/09/2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. L.M. Bhardwaj, for petitioner. Mr. K. Verma, Dy. Govt. Counsel ] Mr. Murari Lal Gupta on behalf of ] for respondents. Mr. N.C. Goyal Matter has come up on application filed by the respondent u/Art.226(3) of the Constitution for vacation of ex parte order dt.15.12.09. The petitioner is working as Enforcement Officer, however in regard to the proceedings which were initiated against a fair price shop dealer regarding certain alleged irregularities the matter travelled upto Additional Food Commissioner, Public Supply and Consumer Department, State of Rajasthan, Jaipur u/s. 22-A of the Essential Commidities Act, 1976 filed at the behest of CW-12278/09 (2) fair price shop dealer. The authority while deciding revision petition observed that the petitioner who was the then Inspector may be chargesheeted for gross irregularity being committed and apart from it disciplinary/criminal action may also be initiated against him. Counsel for petitioner submits that the finding recorded by the authority under the order impugned initiating departmental/ judicial action against the petitioner is uncalled for and has been recorded without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Counsel for the respondents on the other hand submits that the finding which has been recorded by the authority is not final and will be looked into while disciplinary/ judicial action being taken. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court considers it appropriate to clarify the ex parte order dt.15.12.09 that department is free to examine the records and may frame its own independent opinion while initiating any departmental or judicial action against the petitioner but CW-12278/09 (3) will not take decision merely on the basis of finding being recorded by the revisional authority under the order impugned dt.16.7.09. With these clarification/ modification, the application u/Art.226(3) of the Constitution in all these four writ petitions stand disposed of., After the order being recorded, both the counsel jointly submit that the writ petitions may be disposed of in terms of the order referred to supra. Accordingly, in terms of the order referred to supra, these writ petitions also stand disposed of. (Ajay Rastogi),J. VS Shekhawat/-p.3 12278cw09Sep29FnlDsps.doc