Allahabad High Court
Lakhan Singh vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 18 October, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 ALL 1737, (2019) 10 ADJ 656 (ALL), (2019) 137 ALL LR 926, 2020 (138) ALR SOC 9 (ALL)
Author: Y.K. Srivastava
Bench: Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD AFR Court No. 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 61939 of 2015 Petitioner :- Lakhan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Mata Prasad, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents.
2. The present petition seeks to challenge the order dated 15.12.2014 passed by the respondent no.2 whereby the fair price shop agreement of the petitioner was cancelled and also the order dated 08.10.2015 passed by the respondent no.3 in terms of which the appeal filed by the petitioner there against under the provisions of U.P. Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 20161 has also been rejected.
3. The only argument which has been raised by the petitioner is that the order passed by the respondent no.2 cancelling his fair price shop agreement has been passed without considering his case and that the respondent no.3 has also rejected his appeal without assigning any reasons or considering the grounds taken by the petitioner in the appeal.
4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents submits that the order cancelling the fair price shop agreement of the petitioner has been passed after issuance of a show cause notice to the petitioner and due consideration of his reply. It has been pointed out that the respondent no.2 in the order dated 15.12.2014 has recorded its conclusion that the petitioner had indulged in large scale irregularities and in view thereof his fair price shop licence had been cancelled. It is also pointed out that the grounds taken by the petitioner in the appeal have been duly considered by respondent no.3 and the appeal has been rejected by a reasoned order.
5. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the appellate order being an order of affirmation is not required to contain detailed and elaborate reasons and the requirement was only to give some reasons showing due application of mind by the appellate authority.
6. In order to appreciate the rival contentions it would be necessary to advert to the provisions contained under the Control Order, 2016 notified by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 19552 read with the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution for the purposes of maintaining the supplies of foodgrains and other essential commodities and for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices under the targeted public distribution system.
7. The aforementioned Control Order, 2016 provides for identification of eligible households, issuance of ration cards to the eligible households, lifting of foodgrains by the authorized agents of the State Government from the designated depots of the Food Corporation of India (constituted under the Food Corporation of India Act, 1964), and the mechanism for distribution of the foodgrains allocated under the targeted public distribution system.
8. The "Fair Price Shop Owner" has been defined under clause 2(o) of the Control Order, 2016 to mean a person, including a co-operative society, authorized to run a fair price shop under the provisions of this order.
9. The appointment and regulation of fair price shops is provided for under clause 7 of the Control Order, 2016 and the guidelines for the operation of the fair price shops have been provided for under clause 8 thereof.
10. For ease of reference clause 7 and clause 8 of the Control Order, 2016 are being extracted below:-
"7. Appointment and regulation of fair price shops--(1) With a view to affecting fair distribution of foodgrains and scheduled commodities the State Government may issue directions under Section 3 of the Act to such number of fair price shops in an area and in the manner as it deems fit.
(2) (i) A fair price shop shall be run through such person and in such manner as the Collector, subject to the directions of the State Government may decide.
(ii) A person appointed to run a fair price shop under sub-clause (1) shall act as the agent of the State Government.
(iii) A person appointed to run a fair price shop under sub-clause (1) shall sign an agreement, as directed by the State Government regarding running of the fair price shop as per the draft appended to this order before the competent authority prior to the coming with effect of the said appointment.
(3) The Food Commissioner shall ensure that the number of ration card holders attached to a fair price shop are reasonable, the fair price shop is so located that the consumer or ration card holder does not have to face difficulty to reach the fair price shop and that proper coverage is ensured in hilly, desert, tribal and such other areas difficult to access.
(4) The State Government shall fix an amount as the fair price shop owner's margin, which shall be periodically reviewed for ensuring sustained viability of the fair price shop operations.
(5) The Food Commissioner shall put in place a mechanism to ensure the release of fair price shop owner's margin without any delay.
(6) The State Government shall allow sale of commodities other than the foodgrains and other scheduled commodities distributed under the Targeted Public Distribution System at the fair price shop to improve the viability of the fair price shop operations.
8. Operation of fair price shops--(1) The fair price shop owner shall disburse foodgrains to the ration card holders as per his entitlement under the Targeted Public Distribution System.
(2) A ration card holder may draw his full entitlement of food grains in more than one installment.
(3) The fair price shop owner shall not retain the ration cards after the supply of the foodgrains.
(4) The license issued by the State Government to the fair price shop owner shall lay down the duties and responsibilities of the fair price shop owner, which shall include, inter alia, --
(i) Sale of foodgrains as per the entitlement of ration card holders under the Targeted Public Distribution System at the prescribed retail issue price;
(ii) display of information on a notice board at a prominent place in the shop on daily basis regarding
(a) entitlement of food grains,
(b) scale of issue,
(c) retail issue prices,
(d) timings of opening and closing of the fair price shop including lunch break, if any,
(e) stock of foodgrains received during the month,
(f) opening and closing stock of foodgrains,
(g) the mechanism including authority for redressal of grievances with respect to quality and quantity of food grains under the Targeted Public Distribution System and
(h) toll-free helpline number;
(iii) maintenance of the records of ration card holders, e.g. stock register, issue or sale register shall be in the form prescribed by the State Government including in the electronic format in a progressive manner;
(iv) display of samples of food grains being supplied through the fair price shop;
(v) production of books and records relating to the allotment and distribution of food grains to the inspecting agency and furnishing of such information as may be called for by the designated authority;
(vi) the shop keeper shall in the end of each month submit a detailed description of receipt of foodgrain and other essential commodities, actual distribution during the month and remaining balance of stock to designated officer who will send a compilation of all such certificates under his area of appointment to the competent authority;
(vii) opening and closing of the fair price shop as per the prescribed timings displayed on the notice board.
(5) Any ration card holder desirous of obtaining extracts from the records of a fair price shop owner may make a written request to the owner along with the deposit of the fees specified by order by the State Government. The fair price shop owner shall provide such extracts of records to the ration card holder within fourteen days from the date of receipt of a request and the said fee:
Provided that the State Government may prescribe the period for which the records are to be kept for providing the ration card holder by the fair price shop owner.
(6) The State Government shall prescribe the procedure to be followed by the designated authority in cases where the fair price shop owner does not provide the records in the manner referred in sub-clause (5) to the ration card holder in the stipulated period and the designated authority in each case shall ensure that the records are provided to the ration card holder without any undue delay.
(7) The Competent Authority shall take prompt action in respect of violation of any condition of license including any irregularity committed by the fair price shop owner, which may include suspension or cancellation of the fair price shop owner's license.
(8) The maximum period within which proceedings relating to enquiry into irregularities committed by the fair price shop owner shall be concluded, resulting in any action as under sub-clause (7) shall be two months.
(9) In case of suspension or cancellation of the agreement, the Competent Authority shall make alternative arrangements for ensuring uninterrupted supply of food grains to the eligible households:
Provided that in case of cancellation of the agreement of the fair price shop owner, new agreement shall be issued within a month of cancellation.
(10) The State Government shall furnish complete information on action taken against a fair price shop owner under this clause annually to the Central Government in the format at Annexure-V."
11. The Control Order, 2016 provides for an elaborate mechanism for monitoring and ensuring transparency and accountability so as to ensure that the stocks of foodgrains under the Targeted Public Distribution System are not replaced or tampered with during storage, transit or any other stage till delivery to the ration card holder. The provisions relating to monitoring transparency and accountability are provided for under clause 9 and clause 10 of the Control Order, 2016 and the same are being extracted below:-
"9. Monitoring--(1) The Food Commissioner shall ensure regular inspections of fair price shops not less than once in a week by the designated authority in urban area and twice in a month in rural area by the designated authority concerned.
(2) The Food Commissioner shall ensure that stocks of foodgrains under the Targeted Public Distribution System, as issued from the Corporation godowns, are not replaced or tampered with during storage, transit or any other stage till delivery to the ration card holder.
(3) Any authority or any person authorized by The Food Commissioner in this behalf or any other person, who is engaged in the distribution and handling of foodgrains under the Targeted Public Distribution System, shall not indulge in substitution or adulteration or diversion or theft of stocks at any stage till delivery to the ration card holder.
Explanation.--For the purpose of this clause,--
(a) "diversion" means unauthorised movement or delivery of food grains released from godowns but not reaching the intended beneficiaries under the Targeted Public Distribution System.
(b) "substitution" means replacement of food grains released from godowns with the same articles of inferior quality for distribution to the intended beneficiaries under the Targeted Public Distribution System.
(4) The State Government shall set up vigilance committees for the Targeted Public Distribution System at the State, District, Block and fair price shop levels as per the provisions of the Food Security Act to perform functions as specified in the said Act as already specified in Section 9 of Uttar Pradesh Food Security Rules, 2015.
(5) Meetings of the vigilance committees shall be held at least once in every quarter of calendar year as specified in Section 9(3) of Uttar Predesh Food Security Rules, 2015.
(6) The Food Commissioner through State Government shall send a report annually to the Central Government on the functioning of vigilance committees in the format at Annexure-VI.
(7) The number of meetings held by the vigilance committees shall be displayed on the State web portal and the action taken on issues discussed in meetings of vigilance committees shall be reviewed in the next meeting.
(8) The State Government shall notify an internal grievance redressal mechanism which shall include toll free call centres and use of State web portal.
(9) The Food Commissioner shall give wide publicity to the up-to-date details of the Grievance Redressal Officer such as name, telephone number including mobile number, office address and the grievance redressal mechanism.
(10) The State Government may appoint or designate, officers as the District Grievance Redressal Officer; as provided in the Uttar Pradesh State Food Security Rules, 2015.
(11) An appeal against the order of the District Grievance Redressal Officer shall be preferred before the State Food Commission constituted under section 16 of the Uttar Pradesh State Food Commission Rules, 2015.
(12) The Food Commissioner shall furnish a report on quarterly basis to the State Government regarding the handling of grievances in the format at Annexure-VII.
(13) The Food Commissioner shall issue and adopt a Citizen's Charter as stipulated under law or based on the model Citizen's Charter issued by the Central Government.
(14) The Food Commissioner shall prescribe a system of periodic reporting, including through electronic platform, at various levels within the State regarding the functioning of fair price shops.
(15) The Food Commissioner shall ensure monitoring of the end-to-end operations of the Targeted Public Distribution System through the electronic platform.
Explanation.--For the purpose of this sub-clause "end-to-end operations" shall include activities relating to digitization of beneficiary, ration cards, and other databases; computerization of supply chain management; setting up of transparency portal, grievance redressal mechanism and fair price shop automation.
(16) The Food Commissioner shall take necessary steps to educate the ration card holders regarding their rights and privileges by the use of electronic and print media as well as display boards outside the fair price shops.
10. Transparency and accountability--(1) All Targeted Public Distribution System related records shall be placed in the public domain and kept open for inspection to the public in the manner as may be prescribed by the State Government.
(2) Every local authority or any other authority authorized by the State Government which shall conduct or cause to be conducted periodic, social audits on the functioning of fair price shops of Targeted Pubic Distribution System and other welfare schemes after giving fifteen days notice to the said shops or schemes and concerned authorities in accordance with such guidelines as may be notified from time to time by the State Government.
(3) The State Government may, if it considers necessary, conduct or cause to be conducted social audit through independent agencies having experience in conduct of such audits."
12. In terms of clause 8(7) of the Control Order, 2016 the "Competent Authority" defined under clause 2(j) is enjoined to take prompt action in respect of violation of any condition of licence including any irregularity committed by the fair price shop owner, which may include suspension or cancellation of the fair price shop owner's license. Clause 2(j) defines "Competent Authority" as meaning Collector and including Additional District Magistrate (Civil supplies), District Supply Officer and Sub-Divisional Magistrate or Area Rationing Officer.
13. In terms of clause 13(3) any person aggrieved by an order of the Competent Authority suspending or cancelling the fair price shop agreement may file an appeal to the Appellate Authority namely the Divisional Commissioner, the Joint Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner (Food) authorized by him in writing to hear and dispose the appeal within thirty days of the date of receipt of the order and the Appellate Authority shall, as far as practicable, dispose the appeal within a period of sixty days.
14. It may also be taken note of that the commodities which are being distributed through the public distribution system are essential commodities within the meaning of Section 2(a) of the Act, 1955. The 1955 Act was enacted in the interest of general public for control of the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce, in certain commodities. It was enacted by the Parliament in exercise of concurrent jurisdiction under Entry 33, List III, Schedule VII of the Constitution which reads as under:-
"33. Trade and commerce in, and the production, supply and distribution of,--
(a) the products of any industry where the control of such industry by the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest, and imported goods of the same kind as such products;
(b) foodstuffs, including edible oilseeds and oils;
(c) cattle fodder, including oilcakes and other concentrates;
(d) raw cotton, whether ginned or unginned, and cotton seed; and
(e) raw jute."
15. The objectives of the scheme of distribution of essential commodities in terms of the Control Orders issued under the Act, 1955 were succinctly laid down in the case of Kallu Khan Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.3 in the following terms:-
"19. It would be appropriate to consider the basic idea of distribution of essential commodities under the 1955 Act and the system of appointment of agents in furtherance of discharge of the aforesaid function. It cannot be disputed that even before 73rd Amendment of the Constitution the Government has undertaken the responsibility of distribution of essential commodities to public at large at controlled or fair price. The purpose of the said responsibility is obvious. The majority of the citizens in the country live either below poverty live or almost at par or little above thereof. They are not able to meet their two times meals by the meagre income they earn and, therefore, the market forces, if are allowed to operate freely without any protection to such persons, probably majority of such people would be forced to die of starvation and they may not be able to survive at all. This experience we had even before independence and immediately after independence when the hoarders created a situation of scarcity of food items causing virtual revolution in different parts of the country at times. Various social and welfare measure were taken by the then Government and one of the major decision taken with the intervention of Parliament is enactment of 1955 Act conferring power upon the Government to control production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce in certain commodities, namely, essential commodities as defined under Section 2(1) of 1955 Act. Therefore, the basic idea and intention of the legislature under the Act is to make available essential commodities to the public at large at fair price except of the cases where the availability and equitable distribution would be necessary for defence of India or for any efficient conduct of military operations. The Act intends to provide welfare measure for availability of essential commodities to public at large at fair price and rest of the machinery or mechanism is incidental for achieving the aforesaid goal. The appointment of fair price shop dealers, therefore, as such, is not the primary objective of 1955 Act but it is a channel by which the objective of making essential commodities available to public at large at fair price is to be achieved. It is always permissible and open to the Government to make the essential commodities available to public at large at fair price through the agencies or instrumentalities of its own namely, its own officers or officials or by creating a department or alike. Simultaneously, instead of undertaking the said job on its own it can discharge the aforesaid obligation through private persons or bodies by appointing them as its agents. Bereft of the authority conferred upon such agents by the Government for distribution of essential commodities at fair price, such persons had no fundamental or legal right of dealing with such essential commodities on behalf of the Government to distribute to public at large the essential commodities at fair prices, though on their own, in their private capacity, it is always open to them to make the commodities which are essential commodities under the Act available to public at large at fair price without having any corresponding burden upon the Government if there is no otherwise prohibition under any other law and the statutory provisions otherwise controlling the production, storage etc. of such essential commodities are observed by them..."
16. It may be apposite to refer to the provisions of Part IX of the Constitution introduced in terms of 73rd Constitutional Amendment whereunder provisions pertaining to "Panchayat" were inserted providing for its constitution, composition, reservation of seats, duration of Panchayats, disqualification for membership, powers, authority and responsibilities of Panchayats, elections to the Panchayats etc. The aforesaid 73rd Amendment of the Constitution came into force on 24.04.1993. For the purpose of present case it would be appropriate to refer Article 243-G which reads as under:-
"243G. Powers, authority and responsibilities of Panchayats.--Subject to the provisions of the Constitution, the Legislature of a State may, by law, endow the Panchayats with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of self-government and such law may contain provisions for the devolution of powers and responsibilities upon Panchayats at the appropriate level, subject to such conditions as may be specified therein, with respect to--
(a) the preparation of plans for economic development and social justice;
(b) the implementation of schemes for economic development and social justice as may be entrusted to them including those in relation to the matters listed in the Eleventh Schedule."
17. The Eleventh Schedule as referred to in Article 243G contains a list of the matters which may be entrusted to the Panchayats and item 28 thereof reads as under:-
"28. Public distribution system."
18. It would be important to notice at this stage that even prior to 73rd Amendment, Village Panchayat system was already recognised and well established in the State of Uttar Pradesh and was governed by U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947. Consistent with the amendment made in the Constitution, the Act of 1947 was also amended and Section 15 which provides for functions of Gram Panchayat was also substituted by U.P. Act No.9 of 1994. It would be appropriate to reproduce the relevant part of Section 15 as under:-
"15(xxix) Public distribution system:
(a) Promotion of public awareness with regard to the distribution of essential commodities.
(b) Monitoring the public distribution system."
19. The objectives of the public distribution system and its importance in the scheme of distribution of essential commodities to the public at large was emphasized in Gopi Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.4 in the following terms:-
"25. Realising the importance of the Public Distribution System, Parliament while bringing about the 73rd constitutional amendment included the Public Distribution System as one of the primary functions of the Gram Panchayat and it has been incorporated in Article 243-G of Part 9 of the Constitution. The Public Distribution System is obviously a avowed function of the State in order to ensure the distribution of essential commodities fairly. The object is clearly to provide benefit to the public at large in order to ensure supply of essential commodities which is necessary for the sustenance of daily life. The aforesaid object, therefore, has to be fulfilled keeping in view the intention of the legislature which is to promote public awareness and ensure distribution of essential commodities. In essence, the object is to provide benefit to the public at large. As a necessary corollary to the same, the object is not to set up any trade for the benefit of any individual. It may be that by virtue of this licensing system, an individual also gets the opportunity to benefit himself by setting up a fair price distribution unit. However, such a licence does not fall within the category of a fundamental right to carry on trade and business as understood under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The Government Order which has been issued under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, is to regulate the supply and distribution of essential commodities fairly. The suspension of such a licence, pending inquiry is a step in the process of eliminating any such discrepancy which affects the public at large. The authorities while proceeding to suspend a licence, have the authority to attach a fair price shop to another Agency, in order to ensure that the public at large does not suffer on account of such suspension. Thus, viewed from any dimension, the power of suspension if exercised bonafidely in public interest does not by itself cause prejudice to a licensee inasmuch as he has a remedy by filing an appeal against such an order and even otherwise upon the satisfaction of the authority after hearing the objections, the authority can still restore the licence subject to a satisfactory reply being submitted by the licensee.
20. The aforementioned judgments in the case of Kallu Khan Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. and Gopi Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. were subsequently approved by a Full Bench of this Court in Puran Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.5.
21. The records of the present case reflect that the proceedings against the petitioner were initiated with the issuance of a show cause notice dated 25.11.2014 in terms of which the petitioner was given a list of charges, in response to which the petitioner furnished his explanation on 01.12.2014 and upon a detailed and point-wise consideration of the reply submitted by the petitioner the respondent no.2 came to the conclusion that serious irregularities had been committed by the petitioner in running the fair price shop allotted to him which amounted to violation of the guidelines issued by the Government and from a consideration of the material on record the charges against the petitioner stood proved and accordingly the fair price shop agreement was cancelled vide order dated 15.12.2014.
22. The appeal filed there against was taken up before the respondent no.3 and the grounds raised by the petitioner were considered and thereafter the records of the case from the respondent no.2 were also called for and upon due consideration of the material on record and after grant of opportunity of hearing to the petitioner including the explanation furnished before the respondent no.2/licensing authority and the order cancelling the fair price shop agreement the appellate authority has recorded its conclusion that the licensing authority had discussed the material evidence in respect of each of the charge and in view of the same there was no error in the order passed by the licensing authority nor any material facts were brought up in the appeal so as to indicate that the charges against the petitioner were not proved and in view of the entirety of the circumstances the appellate authority held that there was no occasion to interfere in the order passed by the licensing authority and accordingly the appeal was dismissed.
23. The question with regard to the requirement of assigning elaborate and detailed reasons by administrative/quasi judicial authorities exercising appellate or revisional powers came up for consideration in the case of Madhya Pradesh Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors.6, and it was held that the appellate or revisional authorities are required to give reasons succinctly but in a case of affirmance where the original tribunal has given adequate reasons the appellate tribunal may dismiss the appeal or the revision simply by agreeing with those reasons. It was stated that what is essential is that reasons shall be given by the revisional or appellate tribunal expressly or by reference to those given by the original tribunal and the nature and the elaboration of the reasons would depend upon the facts of each case. The relevant observations made in the judgment are as follows:-
"9. ...That apart, when we insist upon reasons, we do not prescribe any particular form or scale of the reasons. The extent and the nature of the reasons depend upon each case. Ordinarily, the appellate or revisional tribunal shall give its own reasons succinctly; but in a case of affirmance where the original tribunal gives adequate reasons, the appellate tribunal may dismiss the appeal or the revision, as the case may be, agreeing with those reasons. What is essential is that reasons shall be given by an appellate or revisional tribunal expressly or by reference to those given by the original tribunal. The nature and the elaboration of the reasons necessarily depend upon the facts of each case..."
24. The nature and extent of the duty to assign reasons by a quasi judicial authority and the requirement to pass a speaking order in issuing an order of affirmance was considered in the case of Tara Chand Khatri Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.7, and it was stated that while it may be necessary for a disciplinary or administrative authority exercising quasi judicial functions to state the reasons in support of its order if it differs from the conclusions arrived at by the authority passing an original order; however it would be laying down the proposition a little too broadly to say that even an order of concurrence was required to be supported by elaborate reasons. The observations made in the judgment are being extracted below:-
"20. ...we would like to make it clear that while it may be necessary for a disciplinary or administrative authority exercising quasi-judicial functions to state the reasons in support of its order if it differs from the conclusions arrived at and the recommendations made by the enquiring officer in view of the scheme of a particular enactment or the rules made thereunder, it would be laying down the proposition a little too broadly to say that even an order of concurrence must be supported by reasons. It cannot also, in our opinion, be laid down as a general rule that an order is a non-speaking order simply because it is brief and not elaborate. Every case, we think, has to be judged in the light of its own facts and circumstances.."
25. The application of principles of natural justice and recording of reasons by an authority exercising quasi judicial functions again came up for consideration in the case of S.N. Mukherjee Vs. Union of India8, and it was held that an authority exercising quasi judicial functions must record reasons for its decisions which should be clear and explicit though not necessarily elaborate; however it was reiterated that this requirement is greater at the original stage and at the appellate or revisional stage while affirming the original decision the authority need not give separate reasons if it agrees with the reasons in the original order. The observations in this regard made in the judgment are being extracted below:-
"36. Reasons, when recorded by an administrative authority in an order passed by it while exercising quasi-judicial functions, would no doubt facilitate the exercise of its jurisdiction by the appellate or supervisory authority. But the other considerations, referred to above, which have also weighed with this Court in holding that an administrative authority must record reasons for its decision, are of no less significance. These considerations show that the recording of reasons by an administrative authority serves a salutary purpose, namely, it excludes chances of arbitrariness and ensures a degree of fairness in the process of decision-making. The said purpose would apply equally to all decisions and its application cannot be confined to decisions which are subject to appeal, revision or judicial review. In our opinion, therefore, the requirement that reasons be recorded should govern the decisions of an administrative authority exercising quasi-judicial functions irrespective of the fact whether the decision is subject to appeal, revision or judicial review. It may, however, be added that it is not required that the reasons should be as elaborate as in the decision of a court of law. The extent and nature of the reasons would depend on particular facts and circumstances. What is necessary is that the reasons are clear and explicit so as to indicate that the authority has given due consideration to the points in controversy. The need for recording of reasons is greater in a case where the order is passed at the original stage. The appellate or revisional authority, if it affirms such an order, need not give separate reasons if the appellate or revisional authority agrees with the reasons contained in the order under challenge."
26. It is thus seen that the Control Order, 2016 was notified by the State Government for the purposes of maintaining the supplies of foodgrains and other essential commodities and for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices under the targeted public distribution system. The provisions under the Control Order for identification of eligible households, issuance of ration cards, lifting of foodgrains by the authorized agents from the designated depots, are aimed at creating a mechanism for distribution of the foodgrains allocated under the targeted public distribution system.
27. It may also be taken note of that the Control Order, 2016 was notified in exercise of powers under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, an enactment made in the interest of the general public for control of production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce, in certain commodities. The basic aim of the enactment is to make available essential commodities to the public at large at fair price as a measure of public welfare. The machinery and the mechanism provided for the purpose by way of appointment of fair price shop dealers is only incidental for achieving the aforementioned goal of making the essential commodities available to public at large at fair price.
28. The importance of the public distribution system has been emphasized with the introduction of Part IX of the Constitution in terms of 73rd Amendment and the matters listed under the Eleventh Schedule in relation to which the Panchayats may be entrusted the powers and responsibilities for implementation of schemes for economic development and social justice includes 'public distribution system' as one of the items. It may be essential to reiterate that the avowed object of the public distribution system is to ensure the distribution of essential commodities in a fair and equitable manner to the public at large. The creation of the licensing system and the mechanism for distribution of foodgrains through dealers and agents is only ancillary to the same.
29. It is in furtherance of the object of the scheme that the Control Order, 2016 provides for an elaborate procedure for monitoring and ensuring transparency and accountability so as to ensure the delivery of the stocks of foodgrains under the Targeted Public Distribution System to the ration card holders. The authorities are enjoined to take prompt action in respect of violation of any condition of licence including any irregularity committed by the fair price shop owner, which may include suspension or cancellation of the fair price shop owner's license. The Control Order, 2016 also provides a forum of appeal to any person aggrieved by the order of the competent authority suspending or cancelling the fair price shop agreement and it provides for disposal of the appeal after due hearing.
30. The authorities under the aforementioned mechanism created under the Control Order, 2016 exercise powers which are of an administrative and quasi judicial nature and the principles of natural justice and the duty to record reasons would get attracted to the orders passed by such authorities. The duty to record reasons would be there in case of the orders to be passed by the authorities exercising appellate power also. An order of affirmation passed by the appellate authority would also require due application of mind and recording of reasons for its decisions which should be clear and explicit though not necessarily detailed and elaborate.
31. In the instant case the proceedings against the petitioner were initiated with the issuance of a show cause notice in terms of which the petitioner was given a list of charges and the explanation furnished in response thereto was considered point-wise and in a detailed manner by the authority before coming to the conclusion that serious irregularities had been committed in running the fair price shop which constituted violation of the guidelines issued by the Government and the charges against the petitioner having been proved the fair price shop agreement was cancelled. The appeal filed there against was taken up by the appellate authority and the grounds raised by the petitioner were considered and thereafter the records of the case from the licensing authority were also called for and upon due consideration of the material on record and grant of opportunity of hearing to the petitioner including the explanation furnished before the licensing authority and the order cancelling the fair price shop agreement the appellate authority proceeded to record its conclusion that the order passed by the licensing authority contained an elaborate discussion with regard to the material evidence in respect of each of the charge and in view of the same there was no error in the order passed by the licensing authority nor any material facts were brought up in the appeal so as to indicate that the charges against the petitioner were not proved and considering the entirety of the circumstances the appeal was dismissed.
32. For the foregoing reasons the orders passed by the licensing authority as also the appellate authority cannot be faulted with.
33. The writ petition thus fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 18.10.2019 Pratima/Shahroz (Dr. Y.K. Srivastava,J.)