DHARAMPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Satya Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the District Supply Officer was not having authority to cancel the license of the fair price shop of the petitioner under the Govt. Order dated 3rd July, 1990. The competent authority is the District Magistrate for such cancellation.

(3.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner who was running fair price shop has been elected as Pradhan of the village. It has also not been disputed that in the said Govt. Order, there is a provision of clause 4.7 which provides that if a person who is Pradhan or Up Pradhan, no resolution shall be in his favour or even in favour of their family members, for allotment of the fair price shop. It is also admitted to the petitioner that this license was granted by the District Supply Officer. The only plea which has been raised is that the District Supply Officer has taken recourse to the provisions of the Govt. Order dated 3rd July, 1990 which prescribes a specific authority i.e. the District Magistrate for cancelling the license and, therefore, the District Supply Officer was not the competent authority to cancel the license.