VINOD S/O SHRI SHYAM LAL, R/O VILLAGE NAITWALA SAIDABAD, TEHSIL LAKSAR, DISTRICT HARDWAR Vs. COMMISSIONER, GARHWAL MANDAL, GARHWAL, CAMP DEHRADUN AND UP ZILA ADHIKARI, LAKSAR, DISTRICT HARDWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A complaint was lodged against the appellant, where it was contended that the appellant is not discharging his obligations pertaining to the licence accorded to him to run the fair price shop of the appellant. The said complaint was inquired by Naib Tehsildar, Laksar and Supply Inspector, Laksar. They submitted an inquiry report, wherein it was indicated that the appellant, in course of running his fair price shop on the basis of the said licence, is guilty of misbehaviour. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant, whereby the appellant was called upon to show cause as to why his licence shall not be cancelled for the charges levelled against him as indicated in the said show cause. Appellant gave a reply thereto. The charges, thus, framed and reply given thereto were not thereupon inquired by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, instead he purported to uphold the inquiry report which was prepared by the Naib Tehsildar, Laksar and Supply Inspector, Laksar, which report came to existence without giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. The Sub Divisional Magistrate thereupon, by the order impugned before the appellate authority, cancelled the said licence of the appellant. The appellate authority also dismissed the appeal holding that the allegations, emanating from the said report, do not justify continuation of the licence of the appellant.

(2.) THE fact remains that by acting in the manner as above, the Sub Divisional Magistrate as well as the appellate authority failed to discharge their obligation of following the principles of natural justice. The fact remains that in view of the said licence, appellant has become a fair price shop dealer and his livelihood is dependant thereon. In order to put the same to rest, it was obligatory to establish that the appellant has failed to discharge his obligations pertaining to the licence. Such failure could only be established by holding an inquiry on the allegations against the appellant in his presence and not on the basis of a report may be made by two government officers but not in the presence of the appellant.

(3.) WE , accordingly, allow the appeal, set aside the judgment and order under appeal and at the same time quash the orders impugned in the writ petition. We hope and expect that the authorities concerned shall now discharge their obligations in accordance with law and shall decide upon the charge sheet issued to the appellant after considering his reply on the basis of evidence to be brought on record in the presence of the appellant.