Court No. - 25
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 52204 of 2017 Petitioner :- Ram Krishna Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Chandra Pandey,Hare Krishan Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Diwakar Singh
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
After the agreement to run the fair price shop was cancelled on 25.09.2017, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority on 10.10.2017. While the appeal was pending the Block Development Officer has directed the Gram Vikas Adhikari to appoint another fair price shop dealer by his order dated 24.10.2017. Aggrieved thereof the present writ petition has been filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the event the appeal which had been filed by him was allowed, then the shop would be given back to him and if any third party right is created in the interregnum, then it shall destabilize the new shopkeeper and, therefore, he insists that no third party right be created Upon hearing both the parties, I am of the considered view that if the appeal which has been filed on 10.10.2017 is decided in favour of the appellant then the shop would go back to him and therefore, till such time the appeal is decided no third party right should be created. In the event the appeal is allowed, the person who would be appointed in pursuance of the order dated 24.10.2017 would have to surrender his licence. This would not only destablize the distribution system but would also put the shopkeeper who would be appointed in the interregnum to a lot of discomfort and disadvantage.
Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction that the appeal itself may be decided within period of one month from the production of a certified copy of this order and till such time the appeal is decided the order dated 24.10.2017 be kept in abeyance.
Order Date :- 7.11.2017 Ashish Pd.