The Revenue Commissioner must decide the appeal on merits without raising limitation.

The Collector, Sidhi, by order dated 6 January 2017, stopped Vipin Chandra Sahu from working as salesman at the Government Fair Price Shop, Thadipathar.

The action followed a report that Sahu had refused to provide shop records to the Assistant Supply Officer during an inspection, indicating possible irregularities in distribution

Sahu challenged the order, contending that the Collector had deprived him of an appellate remedy and caused prejudice.

The State submitted that the Collector had authority under the Madhya Pradesh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015, and that an appeal could be pursued before the Commissioner or State Government.

Whether the petitioner should be afforded an opportunity to appeal the Collector’s order before the Revenue Commissioner, rather than having the writ petition decided on its merits.

Whether the appeal could be considered without regard to limitation, given the circumstances of the case.

Clause 16(7) of the Madhya Pradesh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015, provides for removal of a salesperson from duties involving distribution of PDS commodities where the applicable conditions are met.

Clause 8 permits the Collector, upon finding irregularities in the operation of a fair price shop and where considered expedient, to initiate prosecution against specified persons, including a salesperson.

The Court also proceeded on the basis that an appeal against the Collector’s order could be filed before the Revenue Commissioner of the Division.

The Court noted that the Collector’s order concerned alleged irregularities and failure to produce stock records, but did not determine the merits of those allegations in the writ petition.

It considered that denying the petitioner an available appellate remedy would be unjust, and therefore chose to permit an appeal rather than decide the dispute itself.

To ensure the appeal was considered on its merits, the Court directed the Commissioner not to rely on limitation.

The Commissioner was requested to decide the appeal on its merits within a further 45 days, without adverting to limitation.