V.K. Shukla, J. - (1.) IN the present case Petitioner has approached this Court questioning the validity of the order dated 25.07.2008 passed by Licensing Authority and order of its affirmance dated 19.08.2009 passed by Deputy Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies, Agra Circle, Agra.
(2.) BRIEF background of the case is that Petitioner is fair price shop agent and qua the distribution made by him complaint had been made on 12.05.2008. A joint team of three members was constituted to make inquiry. The said join team conducted inquiry and pointed out 5 major illegalities being committed by the Petitioner in distribution of essential commodities. Based on the said report so submitted, the Licensing Authority proceeded to pass an order of suspension and simultaneously asked the Petitioner to submit his explanation. The Petitioner thereafter submitted his reply contending therein that no illegality whatsoever has been committed by him and entire action taken against him is purely motivated. The Licensing Authority after receiving said reply asked the Supply Inspector to re -verify the contents of the reply. Thereafter, the record in question reflects that adverse report has been submitted against the Petitioner and based on the said report, order of cancellation has been passed. Petitioner preferred an appeal and the said appeal has also been dismissed. At this juncture present writ petition in question has been filed. Pleadings inter se parties have been exchanged and Supplementary Affidavit has been filed appended therein the copy of the order framing charges and copy of the reply so submitted by the Petitioner. Apart from this one Shiv Kumar Sharma has also approached this Court for impleading him as opposite party No. 5 to the writ petition. He is also being heard. Present writ petition has been taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the parties.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner, Shri Ranjeet Saxena contended with vehemence that in the present case procedure adopted is not free and fair, inasmuch as, reply submitted by the Petitioner has not been considered in correct perspective. Coupled with this after reply had been submitted by the Petitioner, further investigation was carried out by Senior Supply Inspector and copy of the said report had never been supplied to the Petitioner and the same had been made foundation and basis for passing the order of cancellation. In such a situation and in this background, Petitioner submits that decision making process, is bad as such writ petition deserves to be allowed.;