Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Chaya Jagan Kale, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging three orders: (i) a Government Order dated 4.7.2007 amending clause 30 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Food Grain Rationing (Second) Order, 1966; (ii) a Government Resolution dated 3.11.2007; and (iii) a judgment and order dated 1.11.2010 passed by the Minister for Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, State of Maharashtra, in a review petition, which cancelled the ration shop allotted to the petitioner and allotted it to Respondent No.4. The facts reveal that the Controller of Rationing issued an advertisement on 4.2.2008 inviting applications for allotment of new ration shops at 289 locations, including Item No.141/08 at Building No.11, Sangharsh Nagar, Chandivali, reserved for individual women. The petitioner applied and, after scrutiny, the Deputy Controller of Rationing by order dated 12.1.2009 sanctioned the allotment in her favour, rejecting other applications. Respondent No.4 and three others filed revision applications before the Minister, which were rejected on 15.10.2009. Subsequently, Respondent No.4 filed a review petition before the Minister, who by order dated 1.11.2010 allowed the review, cancelled the petitioner's allotment, and allotted the shop to Respondent No.4. The petitioner contended that the review order was passed without jurisdiction and without affording her an opportunity of hearing. The court examined the issue and held that the Minister had no power to review his predecessor's order unless such power was expressly conferred by the statute. The court found that the order dated 1.11.2010 was passed in violation of principles of natural justice as the petitioner was not heard. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the order dated 1.11.2010 and restored the allotment in favour of the petitioner. The court did not examine the validity of the Government Order dated 4.7.2007 or the Government Resolution dated 3.11.2007 as they were not pressed. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Review Jurisdiction - Natural Justice - The Minister for Food and Civil Supplies has no power to review his predecessor's order unless expressly conferred by statute; the order dated 1.11.2010 cancelling the allotment of a ration shop to the petitioner was set aside as it was passed without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice, as the petitioner was not heard before the cancellation. (Paras 1-10) B) Food and Civil Supplies - Ration Shop Allotment - Maharashtra Scheduled Food Grain Rationing (Second) Order, 1966 - Clause 30 - The Government Order dated 4.7.2007 amending Clause 30 of the Order was not challenged on merits; the court did not examine its validity. (Paras 2, 10) C) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 - The High Court can interfere with an order passed without jurisdiction and in violation of natural justice; the impugned order dated 1.11.2010 was quashed and set aside. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Minister for Food and Civil Supplies had jurisdiction to review his predecessor's order allotting a ration shop, and whether the petitioner was afforded an opportunity of hearing before the cancellation.
Final Decision
The court quashed and set aside the order dated 1.11.2010 passed by the Minister for Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, State of Maharashtra, and restored the allotment of the ration shop in favour of the petitioner. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- review jurisdiction
- administrative law
- ration shop allotment
- Maharashtra Scheduled Food Grain Rationing (Second) Order
- 1966
