SIYARAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE brief facts of the present case ate that the peti tioner has been continuing to run a fair price shop since 1992. On the basis of some inspection conducted by the Task Force constituted by the District Magistrate, Rampur on 24.6.2006, upon finding certain irregularities, by an or der dated 10.7.2006 the licence of the petitioner was placed under suspension. THEreafter, by an order dated 11.9.2006 passed by the respondent No. 3, the li cence of the petitioner has been cancelled. Challenging the said order, the pe titioner filed an appeal, which has been dismissed by the Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad on 30.4.2008. During the pendency of the ap peal, the respondent No. 5 had been granted the licence on 18.5.2007. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders dated 11.9.2006 and 30.4.2008 as well as order dated 18.5.2007, this writ petition has been filed.

(2.) I have heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 3 and Sri Anuj Kumar for the respondent No. 4 and Sri Sanjay Kumar for re spondent No. 5. Time to file counter affidavit was granted. Respondent No. 5 has filed counter affidavit to which rejoinder affidavit has been filed. The State authorities have not filed counter affidavit despite time having been granted on several occasions. With consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being finally disposed of at the admission stage.

(3.) SRI Sanjay Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5 has adopted the arguments advanced by the learned Standing Counsel and has prayed that the writ petition deserves to be dismissed and he be permitted to continue to run the fair price shop on the basis of the licence granted in his favour on 18.5.2007.