Chittatosh Mookerjee, J. - (1.) Kisori Mohan Saha and Brindaban Pal, who are respectively the respondent No. 1, in these two appeals were "appointed retailer" within the meaning of the West Bengal Rationing Order, 1964 in respect of two A.R. Shops. On July 3, 1978 the Director of Rationing, West Bengal by two separate orders in exercise of powers under sub-paragraph (5) of Paragraph 3 of the West Bengal Rationing Order, 1964 suspended their appointments as appointed retailer with immediate effect. The Deputy Controller of Rationing, Initial Area-I while forwarding the said suspension order directed the Rationing Officer of the Sub-Area concerned to de-link all ration cards from the respective A. R. Shops and to relink them to other neighbouring shops. The Director of Rationing in the same date by two memos informed Kisori Mohan Saha and Brindaban Pal that samples of sugar taken from their shops on chemical examination had been found to be khandsari whereas they had received sugar of C/D-30 quality from the F. C. I. Depot for distribution. The Director of Rationing by the said memos further stated that it appeared that the said two appointed retailers had substituted C/D-30 quality sugar by khandsari sugar and had distributed the latter variety which was much inferior and these acts on their parts were entirely unauthorised and illegal involving serious malpractice much to the detriment of public interest. The Director of Rationing called upon two retailers to showcase to the Special Officer as to why their appointments as appointed retailers should not be revoked or they should not be awarded any other punishment as per law. The retailers were asked to state whether they wanted to be heard in person or through an agent. The Rationing Officer, Central Zone, Park Street, consequent upon the suspension of the appointments of these two persons had de-linked the ration cards registered in their A. R. shops and had re linked these cards to other A. R. shops.
(2.) Kisori Mohan Saha and Brindaban Pal filed two writ petitions challenging suspension of their retailer-ship, de-linking of ration cards from their respective A. R. shops and the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against them. A learned Single Judge was pleased to issue two Rules but did not initially grant interim orders as prayed for. Thereafter, these two petitioners had prayed for interim orders with notice to the respondents. The respondents did not file affidavits-in-opposition in the said temporary injunction matters but had opposed the prayers for interim orders. On July 21, 1978 his Lordship the Hon'ble Mr. Justice G. N. Ray after hearing both parties granted interim' orders directing the respondents of the two Civil Rules not to proceed any further with the show-cause memos issued to the petitioners of the respective Rules. The said respondents were also directed not to give any effect or further effect to the impugned orders of suspension passed against the petitioners. The respondents were further directed to re-link the ration cards since de-linked by the impugned orders to the shops of the petitioners. The said interim orders were directed to continue till the disposal of the two Rules. On the prayer of the learned advocate for the State, the learned Single Judge stayed the operation of the said orders for a period of one week.
(3.) The State of West Bengal and others, being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders of his Lordship Mr. Justice G. N. Ray, have preferred these two appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The operation of the interim orders granted by the learned Single Judge have also remained stayed pending the disposal of the two appeals. We have also considered the facts and circumstances of the cases. We regret that we are unable to agree with the learned Single Judge that the petitioners of the two Civil Rules should be granted interim orders as prayed for by them.;