Virendra Singh, J. - (1.) BY way of this writ petition, the petitioner sought that a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 22.1.2010, passed by respondent No. 3 (Annexure -8 to this writ petition) and a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from issuing fresh licence to the respondent No. 4 as Block Distributor of Kerosene Oil of Block Abholi, district Sant Ravi Das Nagar be issued.
(2.) HEARD Sri S. K. Mishra and Sri Ved Bhushan Pandey, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner. Sri U. N. Sharma, learned senior advocate appearing for the respondent No. 4 M/s. Madhav Prasad Shitaram, learned standing counsel on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3. In the year 1997, the petitioner was appointed as distributor of kerosene oil for block Suriyawan. A new block Abholi was created in which major portion of Block Suriyawan was included. Petitioner's case is that petitioner working as block distributor of kerosene since 1997 incurred heavy expenses on establishment and constructing the storage and underground tank. On creation of new block Abholi, the District Magistrate Sant Ravi Das Nagar initiated proceedings for appointment of distributorship of kerosene oil in the said new block Abholi. The petitioner had also applied for obtaining the distribution ship of block Abholi but the District Magistrate without applying guidelines as mentioned in the Government order dated 19.5.1990 issued the licence in favour of respondent No. 4 on 2.1.2004. Against that licence, the petitioner submitted objection/representations to the District Magistrate as well as to the State Government. The State Government as per order dated 23.2.2005 found the procedure for allotment of distributorship faulty and ordered to cancel the licence granted to respondent No. 4 and to get the offer afresh. Consequently, the District Magistrate on 10.3.2005 cancelled his earlier order dated 2.1.2004, passed in favour of respondent No. 4. Against the order dated 23.2.2005, passed by the State Government, the respondent No. 4 filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 257 of 2006. This Court vide order dated 26.11.2009, passed in the aforesaid writ petition allowed the writ petition thereby quashing the order dated 23.2.2005, passed by State Government and keeping open to the licensing authority to proceed in accordance with law. Thereafter, the District Magistrate proceeded afresh for the allotment of distributorship Petitioner also submitted his application on 22.12.2009 in respect of his claim. The District Magistrate after hearing of both the parties cancelled the earlier allotment order dated 2.1.2004 vide its order dated 24.12.2009. The petitioner submitted that the respondent No. 4 did not file any appeal before the appellate authority as is prescribed under Rule 12 of U.P. Kerosene Oil Control Order, 1962. Hence, the order dated 24.12.2009, passed by the District Magistrate became final.
(3.) IT is further submitted that the District Magistrate in an ex parte manner further passed an order on 6.1.2010 thereby suspending his earlier order passed on 24.12.2009 without issuing any notice or affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and further on 22.1.2010 the District Magistrate again without affording any opportunity to the petitioner cancelled the order dated 24.12.2009 and restored the licence granted on 2.1.2004 to respondent No. 4 arbitrarily and illegally.;