SUMAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri S.M. Iqbal Hasan, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents.

(2.) Present writ petition has been filed to challenge the order dtd. 3/11/2018 passed by the District Supply Officer, Sambhal, cancelling the fair price shop agreement of the petitioner. Further, challenge has been raised to the appeal order dtd. 13/2/2019 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad, rejecting the appeal of the petitioner filed against the order dtd. 3/11/2018.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it transpires, arising from certain complaints etc. a show-cause-notice dtd. 29/6/2018 was issued to the petitioner by the District Supply Officer, Sambhal. It called for reply from the petitioner. Failing that reply, an ex parte proceeding was proposed to be undertaken. Thus, while no specific action was proposed to be taken to award any particular penalty, at the same time, a show-cause-notice containing three charges were levelled against the petitioner. The first was with respect to short supply/non-supply of kerosene oil to the beneficiaries. The second charge was with respect to obnoxious behaviour offered by the petitioner's husband to dissatisfies beneficiaries/unit holders. The third charge was with respect to the fair price shop of the petitioner having been found closed at the time of inspection.