Smt. Gainda Devi Vs State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad High Court 31 Oct 2012 Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 56016 of 2012 (2012) 11 ADJ 717
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 56016 of 2012

Hon'ble Bench

Vineet Saran, J; Mushaffey Ahmad, J

Advocates

Gopal Verma, for the Appellant;

Final Decision

Allowed

Judgement Text

Translate:

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the record. By consent

of the learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition at this stage without calling for a counter-affidavit.

2. The case of the petitioner is that on a vacancy of fair price shop in the village in question, the Gram Sabha passed a resolution in favour of the

petitioner, which was duly communicated by the Block Development Officer to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, who is the Chairman of the Tehsil

Level Committee and who has to take a decision in the matter.

3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 17.7.2012 passed by the Tehsil Level Committee including the Sub-Divisional Magistrate as

respondent No. 2, who is the Chairman of the said Committee.

4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the said order has been passed on a complaint received on 17.7.2012 at the

Tehsil Diwas and on the same date the meeting of the Tehsil Level Committee was held and averments made in the compliant were accepted as

gospel truth and the recommendation made by the Gram Sabha has been turned down and direction has been issued to the Gram Sabha to pass a

fresh resolution.

5. It is contended that neither enquiry with regard to contents of the complaint had been made by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate or by any other

competent officer nor the petitioner was given any opportunity of hearing prior to the decision having been taken by the Committee.

6. It is true that the Committee had the authority to entertain the complaint and take cognizance, but the same would not mean that the Committee

can proceed to act solely on the basis of the complaint without testing its veracity. The committee cannot be permitted to proceed in such arbitrary

manner and if the same is permitted, in every case at the last moment complaint can be filed and treating the same as correct without enquiring into

the complaint and without giving the affected party any opportunity of hearing, each and every resolution of the Gram Sabha can be set aside.

7. In such view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the decision of the Tehsil level Committee insofar as it relates to the case of the petitioner

deserves to be quashed.

8. Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. The decision of the Tehsil Level Committee dated 17.7.2012 insofar as it relates to the petitioner

is quashed. The Tehsil Level Committee shall have to take a fresh decision in accordance with law, after getting the contents of the complaint made

on 17.7.2012 verified and if necessary, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Such decision would be taken as expeditiously as

possible, preferably within six weeks from the date of filing of certified copy of this order before respondent No. 2-Sub-Divisional Magistrate,

Lalganj, district Mirzapur. No order as to costs.

From The Blog
Supreme Court: Hindu Succession Act Excludes Tribal Daughters
Oct
22
2025

Story

Supreme Court: Hindu Succession Act Excludes Tribal Daughters
Read More
Supreme Court Alarmed at 8.82 Lakh Pending Execution Cases
Oct
22
2025

Story

Supreme Court Alarmed at 8.82 Lakh Pending Execution Cases
Read More