ISHAQ MOHAMMAD Vs. COMMISSISONER BAREILLY MANDAL BAREILLY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of the S.D.M., Sadar by which the fair price shop licence of the petitioner has been cancelled against which an appeal was filed and the appellate authority has also in appeal No. 15 of 2002-03 rejected the claim of the petitioner holding that under the agreement or contract in view of clause (16) of Government Order, the licence can be cancelled by the concerned authority without any prior notice. The petitioner was granted licence for the fair price shop of Gram Panchayat Alampur Gajraula. It is stated that on a particular date on Tehsil Diwas various card holders of the concerned Gram Panchayat had gathered and raised complaint against the petitioner. Upon asking them by the concerned authorities that whether licence of the petitioner should be cancelled, they unanimously raised their hands for cancellation. It is also indicated in the order that earlier also complaints were received against which an enquiry was conducted and in the enquiry it was found that the petitioner was distributing 10 kgs of grain less than the prescribed quota and was also over charging for the same.

(2.) The concerned authority, that is, S.D.M. on the basis of some enquiry held earlier and on the basis of complaint as raised before him on the Tehsil Diwas on his motion without calling for any explanation from the petitioner cancelled the licence of the petitioner exercising power purported to be under clause (16) of the relevant Government Order which states that a licence can be cancelled by the concerned authority without any prior notice to the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner aggrieved by the said order preferred an appeal as provided under the Government Order and the appeal has also been rejected on the same ground, i.e., clause (16) of the Government order. Aggrieved by both the orders, the petitioner preferred a writ petition before this Court and this Court on 19.2.2004 while requiring the learned Standing Counsel to file counter-affidavit directed that if in the meantime no licensee has been appointed, it shall not be appointed. This order continued. However, unfortunately the writ petition itself was dismissed in default on 5.8.2010 but the same was also restored on 28.9.2011.