1 S. No. 12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR OWP 1411/2018 CM(3160/2023) CM(8069/2024) MEHRAJUDIN TELI …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Shafqat Nazir, Advocate. Vs. STATE OF J AND K AND ORS.. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, Dy.AG for R 1 to 4. Mr. N. H. Shah, Advocate with Ms. Suwaiba, Advocate for R 5. CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE O R D E R 04.02.2025 (ORAL) 1. The petitioner herein has filed the instant petition seeking for the following reliefs: - A. Certiorari quashing the order No.FCS&CA-Bla/2018 dated 10.04.2018 issued by respondent No. 3 in favour of the private respondent. B. Mandamus directing the respondents to issue a fair price shop licence in favour of the petitioner in accordance with the rules/norms occupying the field. 2. The facts under the shade and cover of which the aforesaid reliefs have been sought, and as are stated in the petition are that the petitioner filed an application before the official respondents for allotment of a fair price shop license for the location of Samad Abad Arampora, Sopore, and that though the application of the petitioner came to be processed by the respondents yet the official respondents instead allotted the said fair price shop license in favour of respondent 5 herein in terms of order No.26- FCS-CA/Bla/2018 dated 10th April 2018, in breach and violation of Government Order bearing No.127-FCS-CA of 2016 dated 4th August 2016, which provides for the norms/guidelines of opening of a fair price shop, issuance of licence thereof and inter-alia prohibits the issuance of any such license in favour of a blood relation of an employee of the 2 Department and that respondent 5 herein is the blood relation (sister of one of the employees) of the department which had been concealed by the respondent 5 herein while seeking the issuance of license in question. 3. Both the official respondents as well as the private respondent herein have filed objections to the petition wherein the petition is being opposed. 4. The official respondents in the objections filed to the petition have opposed the contentions raised and grounds urged in the petition and have stated that the norms/guidelines have been duly followed while issuing the license in question in favour of respondent 5. 5. Respondent 5 as well in the objections filed to the petition has opposed and controverted the contention and pleas raised in the petition and has specifically stated that the license in question has been issued in her favour validly and legally. Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. It is pertinent and significant to mention here that the guidelines/norms issued by the official respondents vide Government Order No.127-FCS- CA of 2016 dated 4th August 2016 supra provide for the policy of opening of a fair price shop and has laid down guidelines thereof inter- alia providing a mechanism to be followed by the official respondents for opening of new fair price shop, selection of salesmen for running of the same, maintenance of shop/records, renewal of license and penalty thereof. Guidelines do provide that no blood relation of an employee of the department will be considered for grant of a license for the fair price shop. However, the guidelines are silent about the process and procedure to be followed in allotting the fair price shop and issuance of a licence thereof. The said deficiency, however, as per record available on the file has been removed by the official respondents while issuing Government Order No. 70-FCS&CA of 2018, dated 12th of March, 2018, appended as Annexure-F to the petition, which provides that the Director, FCS&CA in their respective divisions shall be licensing authority for issuance of a license of fair price shop which license had to be issued on the recommendation of a selection committee comprising of the Director as Chairman, Joint Director, Deputy Director, and Assistant Director, as 3 Members and Member Secretary respectively and such licence are not to be issued unless applications in this regard are invited by the licensing authority after giving wide publicity of the same in electronic /print media. 7. Perusal of the record available on the file also reveals that the official respondents while issuing the impugned license in favour of respondent 5 inasmuch as while entertaining the application of the petitioner for the fair price shop in question the petitioner herein have not issued any kind of advertisement notice. The official respondent, as is manifest there from have acted unfairly, unreasonably and in breach and violation of the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution in the matter. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant petition accordingly, is taken up for final disposal at this stage with the consent of the appearing counsel for the parties and is accordingly disposed of as follows; - “The impugned license issued in favour of the respondent 5 herein vide Order No.26-FCS-CA/Bla/2018 dated 10th April 2018 forming Annexure-III to the petition shall stand quashed and the official respondents shall be at liberty to undertake a fresh process of issuance of a fair price shop license for the location in question strictly in accordance with the guidelines/norms occupying the field, and consider all eligible candidates, including the petitioner and respondent, 5 in case they apply and are eligible and conclude the same preferably within four weeks from the date copy of this order is produced by either of the parties before them. Till such time, the said fresh process is undertaken and concluded, official respondents shall make alternate arrangements for distribution of ration to the consumers/ rationees of the area in question.” 9. Disposed of. (JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE SRINAGAR 04.02.2025 Ishaq Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether approved for reporting ? Yes/No