Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Yedage Vishnu Baba, was allotted a Fair Price Shop at village Tanhali, Taluka Pandharpur, District Solapur, and held a license for kerosene distribution since 2001. On 26 December 2014, respondent nos. 7 and 8 filed a complaint alleging that the petitioner had illegally shifted the Fair Price Shop outside the village without permission from the competent authority, and that the shop was unclean and rates were not displayed. The District Supply Officer, Solapur, by order dated 18 February 2016, and the Deputy Commissioner (Supply), Pune, by order dated 16 May 2017, passed orders in the matter. The petitioner then approached the Minister of Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection, who by order dated 9 January 2018, disposed of the revision. However, the Minister subsequently passed an order dated 26 October 2018, setting aside his earlier order of 9 January 2018, as well as the orders of the District Supply Officer and Deputy Commissioner, and remanded the proceedings to the Deputy Commissioner, Pune, for a detailed enquiry. The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The main legal issues were whether the Minister had jurisdiction to suo motu review his own order without any statutory power, and whether the failure to issue notice to the petitioner before passing the impugned order violated principles of natural justice. The petitioner argued that the Minister had no power to review his own order and that the order was passed without giving him an opportunity of being heard. The respondents, including the State and the complainants, supported the Minister's order. The court analyzed that the Minister's order was without jurisdiction as there was no provision conferring power of review, and the order was passed in violation of natural justice as no notice was given to the petitioner. The court held that the impugned order dated 26 October 2018 was illegal and liable to be quashed. The court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and restored the earlier orders. Rule was made absolute accordingly.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Suo Motu Review - Jurisdiction - Minister's power to review - The Minister set aside his earlier order and orders of subordinate authorities without notice to the petitioner, who was the licensee of a Fair Price Shop. The court held that the Minister lacked jurisdiction to review his own order in the absence of statutory power, and the failure to issue notice violated principles of natural justice. The impugned order was quashed and set aside. (Paras 2-6) B) Essential Commodities Act - Fair Price Shop - License - Transfer of Shop - The petitioner was allotted a Fair Price Shop and kerosene license since 2001. Complaints were filed alleging illegal shifting of the shop outside the village without permission. The court did not adjudicate the merits of the complaint but focused on the procedural illegality in the Minister's order. (Paras 3-4) C) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 - Quashing of order - The High Court exercised its writ jurisdiction to quash the Minister's order dated 26 October 2018, which had set aside earlier orders and remanded the matter for fresh enquiry. The court found the order to be without jurisdiction and in violation of natural justice. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Minister had jurisdiction to suo motu review and set aside his earlier order and other authorities' orders without issuing notice to the petitioner, and whether such action violated principles of natural justice.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 26 October 2018 passed by the Minister of Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection is quashed and set aside. The earlier orders are restored. Rule is made absolute.
Law Points
- Natural Justice
- Suo Motu Review
- Jurisdiction
- Fair Price Shop
- Essential Commodities Act
