- (1.) Instead of disposing of the application for variation of the interim order I propose to dispose of the main writ application by treating the application for variation of the interim order as an affidavit-in-opposition to the main writ application by the private respondent.
(2.) It appears from record that the father of the writ petitioner was a kerosene dealer in respect of the self-same area. On the death of his father, petitioner was given license on compassionate ground. During the subsistence of dealership of the father of the petitioner, license of the private respondent in respect of the adjoining area was cancelled due to his resignation on the ground of illness. On such resignation, the ration cards attached to the dealership of the private respondent were tagged to the dealership of the father of the writ petitioner. After the death of the father of the writ petitioner when a fresh license was granted in favour of the writ petitioner, the writ petitioner inherited all those tagged ration cards attached to the dealership of the father of the writ petitioner.
(3.) In the meantime after surrender of license by the private respondent, his wife applied for reissue of such license in her favour on compassionate ground, but such application was rejected. However, the private respondent after recovering from illness again applied for restoration of such license in his favour and the State-respondent restored the kerosene dealership in favour of the private respondent. After restoration of such license the State-respondent decided to delink the ration cards which were earlier tagged with the dealership of the father of the writ petitioner and subsequently to that of the petitioner, as a result the writ petitioner came up with this writ application.;