1. Heard, Shri Manjeet Singh, Advocate holding brief of Shri Arvind Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Saurav Kumar Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel.
2. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 28.02.2018 passed in appeal No.93 (Shravasti), under Section 28 (3) of the Uttar Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Distribution Order by the Additional Commissioner (Food) Devi Patan Division, Gonda and order dated 14.09.2016, passed by the District Supply Officer, District-Shravasti by means of which the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner has been cancelled.
3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that on the basis of information given by some 'Mukhbir' an inspection was made on 02.06.2016 in presence of the petitioner and without proper inquiry the stock was said to be deficient, therefore, the petitioner's Fair Price Shop licence was suspended and a First Information Report was also lodged under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. Thereafter without affording any opportunity to the petitioner the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner was cancelled by means of order dated 14.09.2016. The appeal filed by the petitioner has also been dismissed on the ground that the First Information Report has been lodged under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and despite sufficient time granted the petitioner has not submitted his reply. The petitioner has been acquitted by means of judgment and order dated 15.09.2018 in case under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, Police Station-Sirsiya, District-Shravasti vide case crime No.914 of 2016 . Therefore the impugned orders are not sustainable in the eye of law and are liable to be quashed and the writ petition is liable to be allowed.
4. On the other hand learned Standing Counsel submitted that on the basis of inspection made on 02.06.2016 in presence of the petitioner deficiency in stock was found, therefore, action was taken and the petitioner's Fair Price Shop licence was suspended and inquiry was conducted, but despite sufficient time granted the petitioner had not submitted any reply, therefore, the licence of the petitioner was cancelled and the appeal filed by the petitioner has also been dismissed. There is no illegality or error in the orders impugned and the same have been passed in accordance with law.
5. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I have perused the record. The inspection of the Fair Price Shop of the petitioner was conducted on 02.06.2016 at 11.40 a.m. on the information given by some 'Mukhbir'. In the inspection some deficiencies were found, therefore, the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner was suspended by means of order dated 06.06.2016 and show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. A First Information Report was also lodged against the petitioner vide case Crime No.914 of 2016, under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act on 02.06.2016. The licence of the petitioner was cancelled by means of order dated 14th of September 2016 on the ground of lodging of FIR and no reply was submitted by the petitioner. But without considering the material available on record or recording any finding on the basis of record. The licence was cancelled mainly on the ground that the First Information Report has been lodged against the petitioner. The appeal of the petitioner has also been dismissed accordingly.
6. The petitioner has been acquitted in the criminal case No.2863 of 2017 lodged vide case crime no.914 of 2016; State Versus Harihar Prasad Tiwari by means of judgment and order dated 15.09.2018 as the allegations levelled against the petitioner could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore the basis of impugned orders does not exist. Perusal of the impugned orders also show that they have been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and without recording any reason by a non speaking order. So the impugned orders dated 28.02.2018 and 14.09.2016, contained in annexure no.1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition are not sustainable and are liable to be quashed.
7. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. The impugned orders dated 28.02.2018 passed in appeal No.93 (Shravasti), under Section 28 (3) of the Uttar Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Distribution Order, 2004 by the Additional Commissioner (Food) Devi Patan Division, Gonda and order dated 14.09.2016, passed by the District Supply Officer, District-Shravasti, contained in annexure no.1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition are quashed. The licence of the petitioner shall be restored. Liberty is granted to hold inquiry afresh in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
...................................(Rajnish Kumar,J.) Order Date :- 16.8.2021 Banswar