RAJ PAL SINGH Vs. COMMISSIONER, GARHWAL DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this writ petition, moved Under Article -226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged impugned orders dated 13 -52002, 22 -7 -2002 and 27 -11 -2003 passed by District Supply Officer, Haridwar and Commissioner, Garhwal Division, whereby the petitioner's licence to run fair price shop was suspended and cancelled, and the appeal is rejected.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioner was selected by Gaon Sabha, Kuankheda for the purpose of running fair price shop at Dallawala. Accordingly he was granted licence by the concerned authorities and is running the fair price shop since 1996. However, respondent no. 2 issued a show cause notice dated 13 -5 -2002 to the petitioner asking his reply on complaint of the villagers regarding alleged irregularities in distribution of the ration. Simultaneously the Hcence of the petitioner was suspended by said show cause notice (copy annexure no. 1 to writ petition). In response to the notice, petitioner submitted his explanation (copy annexure no. 2 to writ petition) to the authority concerned. The respondent no. 4, allegedly without giving petitioner further opportunity of being heard, vide its order dated 22 -72002 (copy annexure no. 3 to writ petition) cancelled the licence of the petitioner to run the fair price shop. Aggrieved by which the petitioner preferred Misc. Appeal No. 31 of 2001 -02 before respondent no.1 but the same was also rejected vide order dated 27 -11 -2003. Hence this writ petition on the ground that the petitioner's licence is cancelled in a arbitrary manner, without affording him proper opportunity of being heard, and without application of mind on the part of the respondent authorities.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5 where by the District Supply Officer has admitted that a show cause notice dated 13 -5 -2002 was issued against the petitioner as to why his licence to run fair price shop be not cancelled. It is stated by the deponent (District Supply Officer) that on the complaint received against the petitioner, inquiry was got made vide order dated 12 -6 -2002, through Supply Inspector, Khanpur. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the Supply Inspector submitted his report dated 10 -7 -2002 and the irregularities were found committed by the petitioner apart from being of rude behavior, Defending the cancellation of the licence of petitioner and rejection of appeal it is stated in the counter affidavit that the grounds mentioned in the writ petition challenging the impugned order are misconceived.