RAFIQ, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THESE three writ petitions pertain to allotment of fair price shop for 1/2 portion of Village Bhukrawali, Tehsil Hindaun, District Karauli. The brief facts giving rise to these petitions are that a notice was issued on 2/2/2007 inviting applications from the candidates desirous to get allotment of fair price dealer shop. Writ petitioner Deshraj in SBCWP No. 4367/07 has come out with the grievance that while advertisement was issued for one fair price shop covering 1/2 of Village Bhukrawali, Tehsil Hindaun, District Karauli, ultimately the respondents have appointed two dealers instead of one, vide order dated 7/5/2007. Had the applicants been invited for two fair price shops instead of one, the other eligible candidates would have also applied. The procedure as contained in the Circulars dated 7/10/2005 & 7/5/2001 issued by the Government has been given a complete go- bye. Writ petitioner Brijendra Singh in SBCWP No. 4366/07 has similarly argued that notice inviting applications was issued by the District Supply Officer for appointment of fair price shop dealer for Village Jatwara, Tehsil Hindaun, District Karauli. Six members of the Allotment Advisory Committee recommended the name of Rohitash Singh S/o Kapur Chand but instead of appointing one, the D. S. O. vide order dated 7/5/2007 appointed two dealers namely; Rohitash Singh and Shyam Singh. In part each of Village Jatwara and that this was done because in the Gram Panchayat Jatwara, number of ration cards were more than 500 and number of units are 4000. It is contended that had it been indicated by the respondents that instead of one dealer, two dealers shall be appointed, the other candidates could also participate in the process but their right to participation has been denied. the reply that was filed by the State supported by the affidavit of officer-in-charge also it was disclosed that two dealers referred to above were appointed for 1/4th part each of village Jatwara and that this was done because in the Gram Panchayat Jatwara, number of ration cards were more than 500 and number of units are 4000. It is contended that had it been indicated by the respondents that instead of one dealer, two dealers shall be appointed, the other candidates couls also participate in the process but their right to participation has bee denied. Writ petitioner Brij Mohan Jat in SBCWP No. 9612/07 has also raised similar grievance with regard to allotment of fair price shop in Gram Panchayat Jatwara, Tehsil Hindaun, District Karauli. He has produced on record the letter of the Government dated 23. 6. 2007 whereby instead of two allotments for half portion of Village Jatwara, three allotments of fair price shops were made in favour of Rohitash, for 1/3rd portion, Shyam Singh for 1/3rd portion and Balveer Singh for 1/3rd portion. It is argued that facts were not correctly disclosed before this Court and in the reply to the writ petition filed by Brijendra Singh, a statement was made that only two allotments of fair price shops have been made in half each portion for Village Jatwara on 17. 9. 2007 whereas third allotment had already been made on 23. 6. 2007.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has argued that according to the procedure of allotment as contained in the Government Circular dated 7/5/2001 issued under clause 20 of the Rajasthan Foodgrains & Other Essential Articles (Regulation of Distribution) Order, 1976 which in turn has been promulgated by the State Government in exercise of power conferred on it by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The vacancies/available shops are required to be notified in advance so that eligible and desirous candidates can apply for allotment of fair price shop on the basis of Allotment Advisory Committee under Form 'a' as provided in clause 3 (iii) of the Order of 1976. Learned counsel for the petitioners while citing Annexure-2 dated 7/5/2001 in SBCWP No. 9612/2007 (Brij Mohan Jat vs. State & Ors.) argued that not a single member of the Allotment Advisory Committee recommended name of Balveer Singh for allotment of fair price shop dealer. Thus, two or three allotments made for fair price shop dealer, instead of one, in the aforesaid villages, the respondents have arbitrarily adopted the method of pick and choose giving a complete go-bye to the Government Circular dated 7/5/2001. Hence, it is prayed that the impugned orders are liable to set-aside. Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of their argument relied on the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Mahesh Chaturvedi vs. State and ors. : S. B. C. W. P. No. 4160/2006 dated 3/10/2006 in which, this Court in similar circumstances, where instead of one allotment as notified, two allotments were eventually made, set-aside the allotment and directed for inviting fresh application within 10 days and complete the selection process within two months. ;