CHHOTEY LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DESPITE time having been granted to the respondents, they have not filed counter-affidavit. However, a short submission has been advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, which is purely legal. Learned Standing Counsel states that he does not propose to file counter-affidavit and the writ petition may be heard and decided at this stage on the basis of material available on record under the Rules of the Court.

(2.) THE petitioner's fair price agreement has been cancelled by order dated 20.2.2007 by the Deputy Collector Sadar, Maharajganj where against his appeal has been rejected by means of the order dated 24.9.2010. THE Deputy Commissioner in the impugned order has recorded his so called findings as under: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_204_ADJ8_2011Image1.jpg</IMG> <IMG>JUDGEMENT_204_ADJ8_2011Image2.jpg</IMG>

(3.) IT is well known that "conclusions" and "reasons" are two different things and reasons must show mental exercise of authorities in arriving at a particular conclusion.