AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondents.
The petitioner who is a licence holder under the Karnataka Essential Commodities (PDS) Control Order, 1992 to distribute the food grains is before this Court for a writ of mandamus to quash the impugned orders passed by the Minister, Food and Civil Supplies- Revisional Authority dated 10.06.2016, as per Annexure-H, the order passed by the Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies - Appellate Authority dated 25.08.2008, as per Annexure-E and the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner - Authorization Authority dated 02.02.2006 as per Annexure-E.
It is the case of the petitioner that he was a licence holder to run a fair price shop with licence bearing No.CSD/2/FPS/D/102/1992-93 to distribute the essential commodities through his fair price shop for two villages namely, Shavanthgera and Hanchinal, taluk and district Raichur. He was running the fair price shop with utmost honesty and sincerity from the past ten years without any complaint by the card holders. Suddenly, in the year 2004, the local food inspector in collusion with some vested interest unilaterally declared that the petitioner was not supplying the food grains and kerosene oil to the yellow card holders and recommended for suspension of the licence. Based on the report of the local food inspector, the Tahsildar has recommended for suspension of licence to the Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner without giving an opportunity to the petitioner and without conducting proper enquiry unilaterally suspended the licence of the petitioner.
Aggrieved by the said suspension order, the petitioner has approached the Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies, Bengaluru by filing an appeal and the said appeal came to be allowed and remanded to the Deputy Commissioner with a direction to conduct proper enquiry and pass orders. After remand, the Deputy Commissioner after holding detail enquiry, by the impugned order dated 02.02.2006 has cancelled the authorization of the petitioner. Against the said order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, the petitioner has filed an appeal bearing No.CFS/Appeal/182/2005-06 before the Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies, Bengaluru, who confirmed the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner by the impugned order dated 25.08.2008 and the same was reaffirmed by the revisional authority on 10.06.2016. Hence, the present writ petition is filed for the relief sought for.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
Sri Vishal Pratap for Sri J.Augustin, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the impugned orders passed by the authorities below canceling the authorization mechanically is without following the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned orders passed by the authorities below are liable to be quashed. He further contended that the petitioner was running the fair price shop from 1992-93 and the impugned orders passed by the authorities are at the instance of the local politicians, the petitioner has been targeted by some political group in collusion with the local food inspector. Therefore, the impugned orders came to be passed without holding proper enquiry as contemplated under the provisions of PDS Control Order. He further contended that the material on record indicates that the petitioner has not committed any illegalities. The authorities below without looking into the records properly, have proceeded to pass the impugned orders and the same are erroneous. Therefore, he sought to quash the impugned orders passed by the authorities below by allowing the writ petition.
Per contra, Smt. Archana P. Tiwari, learned AGA appearing for the respondents sought to justify the impugned orders passed by the authorities below and strenuously contended that when, the licence was issued to the petitioner to distribute the food grains and kerosene oil to the poor people for their day to day livelihood and the same was misused by him. She further contended that there are five charges/irregularities have been committed by the petitioner and in spite of show cause notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner, the he has not filed any objections to the said notice even after lapse of more than one and half months. Initiation of proceedings against the petitioner is based on the complaint given by the card holders. The Deputy Commissioner after complying the provisions of PDS Control Orders specifically held that the petitioner has violated Condition Nos.5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17 and 18 of the authorization. Therefore, the authorization was cancelled and the same was confirmed by the appellate authority and reaffirmed by the revisional authority. Therefore, she sought to dismiss the writ petition.
In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for the parties, the only point that arises for consideration in the present writ petition is:
"Whether the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner cancelling the authorization, confirmed by the appellate authority and reaffirmed by the revisional authority as contemplated under the provisions of PDS Control Order, 1992 is justified in the facts and circumstances of the present case?"
I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material on record carefully.
It is the specific case of the petitioner that he has been running the fair price shop from 1992-93 for more than ten years without any complaint from the card holders. Only on the basis of the report of the local food inspector, the proceedings were initiated without holding proper enquiry resulted the cancellation of the authorization. It is the specific case of the respondents that the petitioner was indulged in black-marketing and he has not distributing the food grains and kerosene oil to yellow card holders. The petitioner has not maintained the proper book stock of register etc.
It is an undisputed fact that before initiation of proceedings against the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner has issued show cause notice on 26.08.2004. The same was received by the petitioner alleging five charges/irregularities committed by him and even after lapse more than one and half months, he has not filed any objections to the said notice. The Deputy Commissioner considering the entire material on record, recorded a finding that the petitioner has violated Condition Nos.5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17 and 18 of the authorization. Therefore, by exercising his powers under Clause 12(1) of the PDS Control Order has cancelled the authorization and has specifically mentioned the card numbers, for which the petitioner has not distributed the food grains and kerosene oil.
The Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies, who is the appellate authority after reassessing the entire material on record has recorded a finding that the material on record clearly indicates that the petitioner has misused the food grains and he was involved in black-marketing. Therefore, the appeal came to be dismissed. The revisional authority by upholding the findings of the authorities below further held that the petitioner was not distributing the food grains to the yellow card holders and the petitioner has not maintained the books and also not produced any documents to disprove the charges made against him. Ultimately, dismissed the revision petition.
All the authorities, namely the authorization authority, appellate authority and the revisional authority recorded a finding that the petitioner has failed to distribute the food grains received from the Government, that
(i) The food grains received from the Government not properly distributed
(ii) Instead of four liters kerosene, he is used to distribute only one or two liters for each card holders.
(iii) He was involved in black market business and has not distributing the food grains to yellow card holders.
(iv) He was not distributing the food grains to Anthyodaya card holders.
(v) The complaint has been filed by 25 card holders alleging that the petitioner was not distributing the food grains properly.
All these charges are proved as concurrently held by the authorities below. Such a finding of fact based on the legal evidence on record cannot be interfered by this Court under Articles 226 and 227of the Constitution of India.
For the reasons stated above, the point raised in the present writ petition has to be answered in the affirmative holding that the authorities below are justified in cancelling the authorization and the same is in accordance with law.
In view of the above, the petitioner has not made out any ground to interfere with the impugned orders passed by the authorities below. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Ordered accordingly.