TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Public Distribution Scheme: High Court restricts issuing of general mandamus where it causes hardship, directs immediate replacement of cancelled shops</h1> Public distribution scheme challenges concerned maintainability of writs while statutory appeals remained pending and the exercise of extraordinary ... General mandamus - public distribution scheme - irregularities in distribution to which he did not file an explanation, despite a show cause notice was issued to him on 9.6.2014 - maintainability of writ where statutory appeal is pending - extraordinary jurisdiction of High Court - public interest and prevention of hardship to beneficiaries - HELD THAT:- The pendency of the appeals forces thousands of the beneficiaries under the Scheme living below poverty line and seeking benefit under the Antyodaya and Anyapurna Schemes to travel a long distance to collect their entitlement of scheduled commodities. The object of the Public Distribution Scheme is to provide scheduled commodities to the beneficiaries at their doorsteps regularly on fair and reasonable prices. The beneficiaries cannot be punished on account of irregularities committed by the fair price shop dealer, who has suffered cancellation of the licence and has filed an appeal. In such cases fresh shops should be immediately settled for the benefits of the beneficiaries under the Scheme subject to the result of the appeal. We find that the general mandamus issued on 19.10.2011 is causing injustice to the general public specially poor persons, who have to travel several kilometers until the person, who has committed irregularities, gets a decision in his appeal. We thus declare that firstly no such general mandamus can be issued by the Court and secondly the Court is not required to pass orders which ultimately result into hardships to the people at large. If any Government Order has been issued in compliance with the directions of this Court dated 19.10.2011 by which a general mandamus is issued, such orders shall be forthwith withdrawn. The State Government will give publicity to the orders with directions that in cases of cancellations of fair price shop, the fresh fair price shop should be immediately settled for the convenience of the general public. Writ petition has been filed within a few days of filing the appeal. Petition is accordingly dismissed. Issues: (i) Whether a High Court may issue a general mandamus restraining settlement of fresh fair price shops pending disposal of appeals against cancellation of licences; and (ii) Whether fresh fair price shops should be immediately settled for beneficiaries pending the result of such appeals.Analysis: The Court examined the effect of a blanket direction preventing settlement of fresh fair price shops while appeals against cancellation of licences remain pending, focusing on the impact on beneficiaries of the Public Distribution Scheme, particularly poor and remote card holders. The Court considered the scope of exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction by the High Court and the appropriateness of issuing generalized directions intended to address recurring litigation, weighing such directions against the hardship caused to large numbers of beneficiaries who would be deprived of convenient access to scheduled commodities.Conclusion: (i) A general mandamus of the kind restraining settlement of fresh fair price shops pending appeals is not permissible; (ii) Fresh fair price shops should be settled immediately for the convenience of beneficiaries notwithstanding pendency of appeals, subject to the result of those appeals.Ratio Decidendi: High Courts should not issue general or blanket mandamus in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction where such orders would cause widespread public hardship; administrative arrangements ensuring immediate settlement of replacement fair price shops pending appeal are appropriate to protect beneficiaries under the Public Distribution Scheme.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
