BEGRAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Mohan Yadav holding brief of Sri Sandeep Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

(2.) COUNTER and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and with consent of learned counsel for the parties this writ petition is being decided finally today itself.

(3.) ACCORDING to Sri Mohan Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is a fair price shop licensee and his license was suspended on a show cause notice dated 24.10.2011. He refers to the show cause notice to state that only cause which the petitioner was required to show was as to why he has not deposited the amount for lifting the quota of the month of November, 2011. Learned counsel refers to the order impugned passed by the Licensing Authority, Sub Divisional Officer, Nageena to state that his license has been cancelled not for the reason given in the show cause notice but on some complaints received on telephone and an inquiry conducted on such a complaint. He states that the complaint received on telephone was never informed to the petitioner nor any show cause notice with respect to irregularities alleged in the oral complaint was ever given to the petitioner. He states that the impugned order canceling his fair price shop license is therefore illegal apart from being in violation of the principle of natural justice. He states that the appellate authority has also rejected his appeal for the very same reason.