HARI NARAYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2014-12-295
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on December 08,2014

HARI NARAYAN SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF U P Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order dated 13.08.2013 passed by the respondent no. 2 - Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mahsi, District Bahraich rejecting the representation of the petitioner with respect to the selection of respondent no. 4 -fair price shop licensee.
(2.) THE petitioner who belongs to the general category was also one of the participant in the open general meeting, when his claim was not recommended, he approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 10279 (M/S) of 2013 which was disposed of by making following observations. "The petitioner does not seem to have made out a case with regard to policy decision of the Government Order dated 17.08.2002 with regard to reservation relating to allotment of fair price shop. The controversy can be look into by the competent authority. The representation of the petitioner is pending. Accordingly, liberty is given to petitioner to approach the appropriate authority to ventilate his grievance. In case the petitioner prefers representation, the competent authority shall look into the matter and take a decision in accordance with law expeditiously say, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and communicate decision. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of."
(3.) IN pursuance of the aforesaid direction issued by this Court the representation of the petitioner was considered by the Sub Divisional Officer and finding that since the post of Pradhan of the Village was reserved for being elected from Scheduled Caste category in accordance with Government Order dated 17.08.2002, the fair price shop also stood reserved for a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Caste category. Admittedly, since the petitioner is member of the general category, in accordance with terms of the Government Order dated 17.08.2002, he could not have been allotted the fair price shop, and thus there reflects no illegality in the impugned order rejecting the claim of the petitioner which may call for interference of this Court. Accordingly, writ petition fails and stand dismissed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.