# Prem Singh v. Brij Bhushan Parashar & Ors

- **Citation:** (2022) 1 ILRA 830
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2022-01-21
- **Case number:** Matters Under Article 227 No. 7815 of 2021
- **Bench:** J.J. Munir, J.J. Munir
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/prem-singh-v-brij-bhushan-parashar-ors-48062
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

A. Civil Law - The Court observed that the
applications for temporary injunctions are
inherently urgent in nature and ought to be
dispensed of swiftly. (Para 4)

Petition Disposed of. (E-10)

## Text

830 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
petitioner in case the petitioner has played
any fraud or has concealed any fact in
obtaining the allotment of the shop. If the
petitioner has committed breach of any
government order and in case it is found
that
the
petitioner
committed
any
irregularity in the distribution of essential
commodities it will be open to the
respondents to pass a fresh order.

With these observations the writ
petition is disposed of."

In the present case, as the order
in question has been passed on account of
complicity of the petitioner in criminal case
and charge sheet filed against him and till
date no order of conviction has been
passed, then in such a situation order of
cancellation is not at all subscribed by law
and same is clerly transgression and over
stepping of jurisdiction.

Consequently,
orders
dated
21.1.2009 passed by the Sub Divisional
Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, District Mirzapur
and order dated 11.3.2010 passed by the
Divisional
Commissioner,
Vindhyachal
Mandal, Vindhyachal are hereby quashed
and set aside.

Consequently, writ petition is
allowed."

8. In present case also, license of fair
price shop was cancelled only on the
ground of lodging of FIR as well as
pendency of criminal case. Apart from that
there is no allegation with regard to black
marketing
or
misuse
of
food-grains,
therefore, this cannot be a ground for
cancellation of license of fair price shop.

9. Accordingly, under such facts of
the case as well as law laid down by this
Court referred hereinabove, impugned
order dated 17.10.2017.2017 passed by Sub
Divisional Magistrate- respondent no. 5 is
hereby quashed and writ petition is
allowed.

10. This Court vide order dated
30.11.2017 has stayed the effect and
operation of the order dated 17.10.2017
passed by respondent no. 5 and petitioner
is running the fair price shop as on date,
therefore, no further order is required for
reinstatement of license and fair price
shop.
----------
(2022)01ILR A830
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 21.01.2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J.

Matters Under Article 227 No. 7815 of 2021

Prem Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
Brij Bhushan Parashar & Ors.
 ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Jitendra Kumar, Sri Sanjeev Kumar Rai

Counsel for the Respondents:
--

A. Civil Law - The Court observed that the
applications for temporary injunctions are
inherently urgent in nature and ought to be
dispensed of swiftly. (Para 4)

Petition Disposed of. (E-10)

(Delivered by Hon'ble J.J. Munir, J.)

1. The Court is convened via Videoconferencing.
1 All. Prem Singh Vs. Brij Bhushan Parashar & Ors.
831

2. This petition has been filed seeking
a direction to the Trial Court to decide the
temporary
injunction
application
in
Original Suit No. 1088 of 2021 Prem Singh
vs. Brij Bhushan Parashar, pending before
the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior
Division), Mathura within a determinate
period of time.

3. In compliance with the order dated
17.01.2022 passed by this Court, the Civil
Judge (Junior Division), Mathura has
submitted a very accurate report about the
proceedings,
which
this
Court
must
appreciate. The material part of the report
reads thus:

2. उक्त के िम में सांबांदधत मूलबाद सांख्या
1088/2021 प्रेम दसांह प्रदत बृजिूषण आदद की
पत्रावली के सम्यक पररशीलनोपरानांत सादर अवगत
कराना है दक उक्त वाद अधोहस्ताक्षरी के न्यार्ालर्
में वादी द्वारा मूलतः दो प्रदतवादीगण बृजिूषण व
श्रीमती मानवती के दवरुद्ध थथाई दनषेधाज्ञा की र्ाचना
के साथ ददनाांक 11.06.21 को सांस्थथत दकर्ा गर्ा था।
दजसमें सांस्थथदतकरण की ददनाांक को एकपक्षीर्
अांतररम व्यादेश के आधा पर्ायप्त न पाते हुर्े
दवपक्षीगण/प्रदतवादी
गण
को
नोदटस
ददनाांक
19.07.21 हेतु दनगयत दकर्े गर्े थे। दकन्तु दनर्त
ददनाांक 19.07.21 से पूवय ही वादी द्वारा ददनाांक
12.07.21 को श्रीमती मिला व श्रीमती सोनदेवी को
नवीन प्रदतवादी प्रस्तादवत करते हुर्े एक सांशोधन
प्राथयना पत्र 16 क पत्रावली पर प्रस्तुत दकर्ा गर्ा।
जोदक ददनाांक 05.08.21 को अधोहस्ताक्षरी न्यार्ालर्
द्वारा स्वीकार करते हुर्े वादी को वाांदित सांशोधन
अांदर सात ददन दकर्े जाने तथा सांशोधनपराांत समस्त
प्रदतवादी गण पर अांदर तीन ददवस पैरवी दकर्े जाने
हेतु दनदेदशत दकर्ा गर्ा था।
3. वाांदित सांशोधन तथा पैरवी उपराांत सिी
प्रदतवादीगण पर ददनाांक 13.10.21 को तामील पर्ायप्त
अदिधाररत करते हुर्े प्रदतवादपत्र हेतु सिी
प्रदतवादीगण को ददनाांक 20.11.21 को वादी द्वारा
अथथाई दनषेधाज्ञा हेतु पुनः एक प्राथयना पत्र 20ग
ददर्ा गर्ा।
4. दनर्त ददनाांक 20.11.21 को प्रदतवादी सांख्या 1 व 2
ने उपस्थथत आकर नकलोां की र्ाचना की। अदग्रम
दनर्त ददनाांक 30.11.21 को वादी ने प्रदतवादीगण को
नकलें प्रदान की तथा पक्षोां को अथथाई दनषेधाज्ञा
प्राथयना पत्र के दनस्तारण के सांबांध में अांदतम अवसर
ददर्ा गर्ा।
5. अदग्रम दनर्त ददनाांक 03.01.211 को पक्षकार
अनुपस्थथत रहे, र्द्यदप प्रदतवादी सांख्या 1 लगार्त 4
द्वारा प्रदतवादपत्र व अथथाई दनषेधाज्ञा प्राथयना पत्र के
दवरुद्ध आपदत्त पत्रावली पर प्रस्तुत की गर्ी। दजसके
िम में अदग्रम ददनाांक 01.02.22 दनर्त की गर्ी है।
6. इस प्रकार प्राथयना पत्र अथथाई दनषेधाज्ञा के
दनस्तारण में हुआ दवलांब प्रदिर्ात्मक है तथा दनर्त
ददनाांक को पक्षोां को सुनकर अथथाई दनषेधज्ञा प्राथयना
पत्र का दवदधनुसार दनस्तारण करने हेतु अधोहस्ताक्षरी
न्यार्ालर् कृतसांकल्प

4. It goes without saying that
temporary
injunction
applications
are
inherently urgent in nature and ought to be
disposed of swiftly. Here the report
submitted by the learned Judge shows that
the defendants have appears and filed their
written statements as also objections to the
temporary injunction application. The next
date fixed is 01.02.2022.

5. Looking to the nature of the order
that this Court proposes to pass, issue of
notice to the private respondents is
dispensed with. However, in case the said
832 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
respondents feel aggrieved, it will be open
to them to make an application in the
decided petition.

6. In the circumstances, the learned
Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mathura is
directed to dispose of the pending interim
injunction application in Original Suit No.
1088 of 2021 Prem Singh vs. Brij Bhushan
Parashar, positively on the next date fixed
i.e. 01.02.2022, after hearing all parties to
the suit. If for some reason, the temporary
injunction application cannot be disposed
of on the next date fixed, it shall be
disposed of within the next 15 days.

7. It is made clear that the case will
not be adjourned because of any strike or
other resolution from the Bar Association
asking their members not to abstain from
judicial work. Learned Counsel appearing
in this case or those who desire to appear at
the hearing of the temporary injunction
application will assist the Court irrespective
of any Bar resolution.

8. This petition is disposed of in
terms of the aforesaid orders.

9. Let this order be communicated to the
learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mathura
through the learned District Judge, Mathura by
Monday, the 24th January, 2022.
----------
(2022)01ILR A832
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 17.01.2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J.

Civil Misc. Arbitration Appl. No. 12 of 2021

CG Power & Indus. Solutions Ltd.
 ...Applicant
Versus
U.P. Power Transmission Corp. Ltd.
 ...Opp. Party

Counsel for the Applicant:
Gantavya, Meha Rashmi

Counsel for the Opp. Party:
Karuna Thareja, Romit Seth, Shishir Prakash

Electricity Act, 2003 -Section 67 -
Applicant
served
notice
proposing
three persons for appointment as
Arbitrator-respondent refused to give
consent-insisted that under clause 38
only chairman of UPPTCL could from
Arbitral
tribunal-upon
failure
to
agree
upon
appointment
of
Arbitrator-present Application filed-
Applicant neither a licensee nor a
generating
company-neither
generated electricity nor supplied to
the Respondent-Supply Agreement is
for
supply
of
materials
and
equipment-dispute-Reliance
upon
section 67 of Electricity Act, 2003
misconceived.

Application allowed. (E-9)

List of Cases cited:

1. Haryana Space Application Centre Vs Pan
India Consultants Private Limited (Civil appeal
No.131 (8) of 2021 decided on 20.01.202
Ltd.2017(4) SCC 665

2. TRF Ltd. Vs Aniruddha Engineering Projects
Ltd. 2017 (8) SCC 377

3. Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. Vs Essar
Power Ltd. 2008 (4) SCC 755

4. Tamil Nadu Generation & Distributiotd. 2014
(11) SCC 53

5. Hindustan Zinc, 2019 (17) SCC 882

6. Writ-C No.11295 of 2019 (Akhilesh Kumar Vs
St. of U.P.)

7. Duro Felguera S.A. Vs Gangavaran Port
Limited 2017 (9) SCC 729