- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for respondents. Petitioner's licence/ agreement/ dealership to run fair price shop was cancelled by District Supply Officer, Kanpur Nagar through order dated 27.04.2006. Against the said order petitioner filed Appeal No.545 of 2006, which was dismissed by Deputy Commissioner (Food), Kanpur on 25.09.2006 hence this writ petition.
(2.) PETITIONER was granted licence to run fair price shop at Village Surauli Post Deosar Tehsil Sadar District Kanpur Nagar. Through order dated 31.10.2005 ration card holders of adjoining village Dalelpur were also attached with the shop of the petitioner on the ground that licence of Smt. Nirmala Devi fair price shop dealer of village Dalelpur was suspended. Annexure-2 to the writ petition is suspension order dated 17.12.2005 passed against the petitioners. It is mentioned in the said order that inspection was made on 26.11.2005. Through the said order, petitioner was also required to submit his reply. The allegations mainly related to the ration card holders of village Dalelpur. Petitioner gave reply on 27.12.2005, copy of which is Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Petitioner stated that in respect of card holders of Dalelpur he was only supplied kerosene oil for the month of November, 2005 and other essential commodities for the said month in respect of card holders of Dalelpur had already been lifted by Smt. Nirmala Devi. From the perusal of cancellation order dated 27.04.2006 passed by D.S.O. Kanpur Nagar, Annexure-6 to the writ petition, it is quite clear that the allegations against the petitioners were in respect of card holders of Dalelpur. The precise allegation was that for several months food-grains had not been supplied to them. For this petitioner could not be held liable as only in November, 2005 these card holders were attached with the petitioner. There were also the allegations in respect of some APL card holders that on their cards there was no entry for last two years, however there was no mention as to whether in the distribution register petitioner showed that he had supplied the ration to those card holders or not. Along with the reply petitioner had also submitted photostat copy of the register, certificate of Pradhan and copies of statement of some card holders. Neither the D.S.O. nor the Commissioner referred to those documents. Annexure-4 is copy of the statements containing signatures or thumb impressions of more than 100 persons. Annexure-5 to the writ petition is report dated 25.03.2006. In Annexure-6, the name and designation of the person giving report is not mentioned, however in para-1 it is mentioned that it was the report of one Food Inspector. Neither his name nor designation has been mentioned. Accordingly, no reliance can be placed thereupon.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY , the impugned orders are perverse as they have not taken into consideration the relevant facts and are based on irrelevant evidence (non-distribution of essential commodities to Dalalpur card holders prior to November, 2005).;