# Assn v. Central Valuation Board

- **Citation:** (2012) 1 ILRA 83
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2012-01-19
- **Bench:** Devi Prasad Singh, S.C. Chaurasia
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/assn-v-central-valuation-board-42263
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

Constitution of India, Article 226-non
supply of essential commodities to BPL
card holder-only reason disclosed on
certain irregularity committed by dealersupply could not be made-shocking state
of affairs-general Mandamus issued-the
secretary to issue guide lines circular-all
concern authorities at the time of
passing suspension-cancellation order
simultaneously alternative arrangement
for
un-interrupted
distribution-and
allotment order must be passed.

Held: Para 10

 Let the Chief Secretary of the State of
U.P. issue appropriate order or circular
keeping
in
view
the
aforesaid
observations to safeguard the interest of
B.P.L. card holders and other persons
belonging to below poverty line for
continuance
supply
of
essential
commodities during the pendency of
enquiry against the fair price shop dealer
or in the event of stoppage of supply of
essential commodities by the fair price
shop dealers.
84 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012

## Text

1 All] Badka and others V. District Magistrate Bahraich and others
83

13. Same view has been reiterated
in the cases of Canara Bank Vs. V.K.
Awasthy,
2005
(6)
SCC
321;
Bidhannagar
(Salt
Lake)
Welfare
Assn. Vs. Central Valuation Board
and others, (2007) 6 SCC 668; and
Devdutt Vs. Union of India and others,
2008 (3) ESC 433 (SC). The basic idea
of observing the principles of natural
justice is to secure justice or to put it
negatively to prevent miscarriage of
justice. The aforesaid decisions still hold
field
and
have
been
followed
in
numerous
cases,
decided
thereafter,
which need not to be detailed here.

14. In view of the foregoing
discussions the writ petition succeeds
and is allowed The impugned order dated
25.09.2007 passed by Superintendent of
Police Baghpat is hereby quashed. The
respondents are directed to reinstate the
petitioner forthwith in service. It is also
provided that this order will not preclude
the respondents to pass fresh order in
accordance with law. It is also clarified
that the petitioner shall be entitled only
current salary and the payment of back
wages will depend on the fate of the
inquiry, if any. In case the department do
not hold any inquiry the petitioner shall
be entitled only 50% of the back wages.
It is further provided the final decision in
this regard be taken by the department
expeditiously
preferably
within
six
months from the date of receipt of
certified copy of the order of this Court.
---------

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 19.01.2012

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DEVI PRASAD SINGH,J.
THE HON'BLE S.C. CHAURASIA,J.

MISC. BENCH No. - 8925 of 2011

Badka and others

 ...Petitioner
Versus
District Magistrate Bahraich and others

 ...Respondent

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Mohd. Nafees
Sri V.P.Nagaur

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.
Sri D.R.Misra

Constitution of India, Article 226-non
supply of essential commodities to BPL
card holder-only reason disclosed on
certain irregularity committed by dealersupply could not be made-shocking state
of affairs-general Mandamus issued-the
secretary to issue guide lines circular-all
concern authorities at the time of
passing suspension-cancellation order
simultaneously alternative arrangement
for
un-interrupted
distribution-and
allotment order must be passed.

Held: Para 10

 Let the Chief Secretary of the State of
U.P. issue appropriate order or circular
keeping
in
view
the
aforesaid
observations to safeguard the interest of
B.P.L. card holders and other persons
belonging to below poverty line for
continuance
supply
of
essential
commodities during the pendency of
enquiry against the fair price shop dealer
or in the event of stoppage of supply of
essential commodities by the fair price
shop dealers.
84 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012
(Delivered by Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh,J. )

1. Heard learned counsel for the
parties and perused the record.

2. Inspite of this Court's order dated
09.09.2011, no counter affidavit has been
filed by learned Standing Counsel.
Keeping in view the material available on
record, we proceed to decide the writ
petition finally at the admission stage with
the consent of parties.

3. The petitioners are villagers
belonging to lower cadre of society,
possessing B.P.L. Cards. Their grievance
is that they are not being extended the
benefit in term of Government Orders
available to the B.P.L. card holders.
According to Sri V.P. Nagaur, learned
counsel for the petitioners, the fair price
shop dealer located in the locality of the
petitioners, is not providing the essential
commodities to the petitioners' family.
Hence, the family members of the
petitioners are suffering with great
hardship.

4. On the other hand, learned
Standing Counsel, as per instruction
received, submits that the enquiry was
held and fair price shop dealer has been
found to be indulged in corrupt practice
and appropriate action is likely to be
taken against him. What action, the
Government took, against the fair price
shop dealer, is not concerned of the
petitioners, but they are concerned with
few kg. of rice, wheat and sugar for which
they are entitled on account of B.P.L.
card.

5. In case, some enquiry is pending,
then
the
District
Magistrate/SubDivisional Magistrate concerned should
have made alternative arrangement for
supply of uninterrupted supply of the
essential commodities to the petitioners
and other similarly situated B.P.L. card
holders.

6. Right to life is a fundamental
right and it is bounden duty of the State
Government to ensure that the persons of
the lower cadre of the society are being
provided necessary essential commodities
in accordance to rules. The entitlement of
the petitioners or other B.P.L. card
holders could not be withheld by the
district authorities merely because certain
enquiry is pending against the fair price
shop dealer. The District Magistrate
concerned should have taken appropriate
steps during the course of pendency of
enquiry to ensure that the essential
commodities are being supplied to the
citizens or the B.P.L. card holders and
other persons of the lower cadre of the
society whose livelihood is based on
supply of food grains and essential
commodities through fair price shops
licenced by the Government.

7. In the present case, it appears that
after receipt of complaint, the Sub-
Divisional
Magistrate,
Kaiserganj,
District-Bahraich, has initiated an enquiry
against the fair price shop dealer, but, has
forgotten his responsibility to make some
alternative arrangement for supply of the
essential commodities to the B.P.L. card
holders and others belonging to below the
poverty line during the pendency of the
enquiry.

8. In the aforesaid situation, it shall
always be appropriate for the District
Magistrates to ensure that the alternative
arrangement
must
be
made
for
continuous
supply
of
essential
1 All] Badka and others V. District Magistrate Bahraich and others
85
commodities in accordance to rules.
Whenever, fair price shop is suspended or
license
is
cancelled,
simultaneous
alternative arrangement should be made
for continuance supply of essential
commodities not only to B.P.L. card
holders but, also to other citizens who are
passing life below the poverty line.

9. Reply given by learned Standing
Counsel on the basis of instructions
received that the petitioners are not being
supplied essential commodities because of
action taken against the fair price shop
dealer, is not satisfactory. After receipt of
complaint, simultaneous decision should
have been taken to make alternative
arrangement. We may take note of the
fact that almost every day the writ
petitions are being filed in this Court by
the B.P.L. card holders and other persons
falling below the poverty line for supply
of essential commodities on one or other
grounds.
The
supply
of
essential
commodities are being stopped because of
action taken against the fair price shop
dealer. It is unfortunate and disturbing
that the persons who are passing life
below the poverty line and are the
foundational
section
of
society
in
constituting Government through their
valuable
votes
and
anyhow
are
maintaining their family members have
been compelled to approach this Court on
account of inaction on the part of the
authorities, to make a prayer for supply of
food grains by the fair price shop dealer.
The State Government must look into the
matter and appropriate order or direction
may be issued providing necessary
safeguard to the persons belonging to
below poverty line/B.P.L. card holders for
uninterrupted supply of food grains and
other essential commodities, during the
pendency of the enquiry/suspension of
license of the fair price shop dealers.
Alternative arrangement must be made
immediately and order should be passed
on the same date when the license of the
fair price shop is suspended, revoked or
for any reason its supply is stopped.

10. Let the Chief Secretary of the
State of U.P. issue appropriate order or
circular keeping in view the aforesaid
observations to safeguard the interest of
B.P.L. card holders and other persons
belonging to below poverty line for
continuance
supply
of
essential
commodities during the pendency of
enquiry against the fair price shop dealer
or in the event of stoppage of supply of
essential commodities by the fair price
shop dealers.

11. The copy of the present order
shall be sent to the State Government as
well as to the Principal Secretary, Food
and Civil Supply by Registry forthwith.
Let the compliance report of this order be
submitted by the State Government within
one month. The case shall be listed
immediately
after
one
month
for
monitoring.. Learned Standing Counsel
shall also communicate the order passed
today
immediately
to
the
State
Government.

12. The writ petition is allowed
accordingly.

13. The certified copy of the present
order shall also be sent by Registry to the
District Magistrate, Bahraich, who shall
take immediate action keeping in view the
aforesaid observation for supply of
essential commodities to the petitioners
and other similarly situated persons.
---------
86 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 19.01.2012

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE VINEET SARAN,J.
THE HON'BLE ASHOK PAL SINGH,J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32716 of 2011

Smt. Asha Sharma

 ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Ramesh Chand Tiwari
Sri P.S. Baghel
Sri R.C. Dwivedi

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.

Constitution
of
India,Article
226Allotment of Fair Price Shop license-on
compassionate
ground-rejected
on
ground-when
cancellation
order
got
finality in the life time of dealer-no
question of compassionate allotmentsmisconceived-when cancellation order
affecting 22 other persons including
husband
of
petitioner
restored
automatically-was
no
occasion
for
challenging the same-admittedly till the
date of death her husband run the shopallotment on compassionate ground in
view of G.O. 17.08.2002 can not be
denied.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Vineet Saran,J. )

1. The brief facts of the case are that
husband of the petitioner Late Bhupendra
Sharma who was a fair price dealer was
appointed on 20.9.1997 along with 22
other persons who were also aggrieved by
the same order. Then by order dated
2.7.1998 the appointment of the petitioner
as well as the other 22 persons had been
cancelled. Challenging the same, one of
such persons whose appointment had
been cancelled filed a writ petition before
Lucknow Bench of this Court being Writ
Petition No.2105(MB) of 1998 in which
an interim order was granted. Pursuant
thereto the respondent authorities restored
the fair price shop of the husband of the
petitioner Late Bhupendra Sharma also.
Husband of the petitioner continued to run
the shop till his death on 1.10.2010. After
the death of her husband, the petitioner
filed an application on 14.10.2010 for
appointment of the fair price shop dealer
in place of her husband on compassionate
ground, in terms of the Government Order
dated 17.8.2002 which provides for such
appointment to the dependents of the
deceased fair price shop dealers on
fulfillment of the conditions mentioned in
the said Government Order. The said
application of the petitioner had been
rejected by order dated 28.4.2011 passed
by the District Supply Officer, Agra. By a
subsequent order dated 19.5.2011 passed
by the District Supply Officer, Agra, the
petitioner has been given liberty to file a
fresh application for grant of fair price
shop dealer on the basis of merits on the
vacancy created on the death of husband
of
the
petitioner.
Challenging
the
aforesaid orders dated 28.4.2011 and
19.5.2011 passed by the District Supply
Officer, this writ petition has been filed.

2. We have heard Sri R.C.Tiwari,
learned counsel for the petitioner as well
as learned standing counsel appearing for
the petitioner. Pleadings between the
parties have been exchanged and with
consent of learned counsel for the parties
this petition is being disposed of at the
admission stage.

3. The ground on which the
application for grant of fair price shop