- (1.) Heard Sri A.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1,2 and 3 and Sri Mahendra Prakash for Respondent no.5 who is the subsequent licensee of the fair price shop.
(2.) The contention raised by the petitioner is that the entire dispute was malafidely initiated at the instance of a Cabinet Minister of the then Ruling Government, and on the basis of an ex-parte inquiry which was conducted by recording statements of those persons who were not even subject matter of subsequent inquiry. Learned counsel submits that there was no material or evidence to indicate any basis for the said complaints, therefore, the issuance of the charge-sheet was without substance.
(3.) Sri A.K. Singh further invited the attention of the Court to the to the contents of? the written reply to the charge-sheet that has not been considered by the District Supply officer while passing the impugned order dated 26th July, 2007 as such the same is erroneous. An appeal was filed against the said order which was also dismissed and it is urged that the appellate order is equally erroneous on facts as well as on law.;