- (1.) THIS petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "It is therefore humbly prayed that the writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 7/12/2011 (Annexure-7) passed by the respondent No.1 to 3 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the respondent may kindly be directed to make allotment of fare price shop authorization to the petitioner for the 1/3rd newly created area of village Isarda. Or any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem think fit and proper be pass in favour of the petitioner. "
(2.) THAT pursuant to an Advertisement dated 27th May, 2011, for the grant of authorization to run a Fair Price Shop at village Isarda, Tehsil Choth Ka Barwada, District Sawai Madhopur, the petitioner Dilip Singh Rajawat and the respondent no.4 Mukesh Kumar Nawaria secured 2 votes each in the meeting of the Allotment Advisory Committee. Other members of the Committee were absent. Consequent for lack of unanimity in the meeting of the Allotment Advisory Committee in choosing a candidate, in terms of the Circular dated 27th February, 2009, the matter was referred to the Government. The matter thereupon was considered by the State Government in terms of Circular dated 23rd June, 2011 read with instructions dated 27th February, 2009 for allotment of the dealership for the Fair Price Shop (1/3rd part) at village Isarda. The State Government taking into consideration the fact that the respondent no.4 was a graduate while the petitioner was only a secondary pass, decided to make allotment on the aforesaid basis to the respondent no.4 on ground of higher educational qualification. It is not in dispute that the selection of a dealer for running Fair Price Shop is an exercise of administrative power and where the decision by the State Government in the course of exercise of such administrative powers is neither unjust or arbitrary, there is no occasion for this Court to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. I also do not find any force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent no.4 ought to have been disqualified in terms of the condition of the Circular dated 27th February, 2009 that the applicant seeking grant of authorization to run a Fair Price Shop ought to have good conduct and that in view of a pending inquiry against the respondent no.4 with regard to alleged misappropriation during his earlier tenure as Sarpanch of Village Isarda, the petitioner's case ought to have been considered and that of respondent no.4 rejected. Counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that under letter dated 18th July, 2011 under the hand of the District Project Co-ordinator (EGS) District Collector, Sawai Madhopur, a direction was made that proceedings against the respondent no.4 be initiated under Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act and steps be taken to recover ¼ of the amount of Rs. 32,75,112/- from the respondent no.4, in view of the fact that the expenses incurred during his tenureship as Sarpanch exceeded the value of assets created. Counsel for the respondent no.4, however, pointed out that the order dated 18th July, 2011 issued by the District Project Co-ordinator and District Collector, Sawai Madhopur was occasioned by reporting of facts and consequently, on a representation made by the respnodent no.4, the District Collector vide order dated 8th September, 2011 has directed a re-inquiry into the matter. Counsel for the respondent no.4 submits that in this view of matter, there is no material to hold that the respondent did not have good conduct or that in the absence thereof he was disqualified to be considered in terms of the conditions of circular dated 27th February, 2009 pertaining to the considerations relevant for the grant of authorization to run a Fair Price Shop. In my considered opinion, in view of the order dated 8th September, 2011 issued by the District Collector, the order dated 18th July, 2011 automatically goes into abeyance and cannot be relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner to contend that in view of the aforesaid order dated 18th July, 2011, the respondent no. 4 ought not to have been considered for grant of authorization to run a Fair Price Shop (1/3rd part) in village Isarda. This court has earlier taken a view in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18373/2011 vide order dated 30th April, 2012 that where a choice is made by the State Government on the basis of higher educational qualification amongst two applicants with equal votes in the meeting of the Allotment Advisory Committee for the purpose of grant of authorization to run the Fair Price Shop, such selection cannot be termed arbitrary and the writ jurisdiction of this Court ought not to be invoked in such cases. Counsel for the petitioner, the respondent no.4 as also Mr. K. Verma Addl. Government Counsel have admitted that the aforesaid order dated 30th April, 2012 has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court. Consequently, I find no reason to interfere in the writ petition and the writ petition is hereby dismissed. However, at this stage, counsel for the petitioner has referred to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 681/2012 decided on 17th August, 2012, wherein the Hon'ble Division Bench has directed that in the event the appellant therein Kailash Chand Jangid (similarly left out in a tie) were to file an application to the respondent department within 15 days of the passing of the Division Bench order dated 17th August, 2012, for keeping the name of the appellant in the aforesaid appeal in the reserved list for allotment of a Fair Price Shop in village in event of vacancy arising for any reason whatsoever, the Government would consider the application and decide it by a speaking and reasoned order.
(3.) MR. K. Verma Addl. Government Counsel has no objection if such direction is similarly issued in the present case. Consequently, even while dismissing the writ petition, for the reasons detailed above, I would direct that in the event, the petitioner Dilip Singh Rajawat were to file an application within 15 days from today to the District Supply Officer, Sawai Madhopur for his name to be kept in reserved list for allotment of a Fair Price dealership in village Isarda to be invoked when any vacancy arose for whatever reason, the said application be considered in accordance with law by the District Supply Officer, Sawai Madhopur and decided on merits by a reasoned order.;