Satya Poot Mehrotra and Anjani Kumar Mishra, JJ. - (1.) WE have heard, Sri Pankaj Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, and perused the record.
(2.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for quashing the order dated 9.4.2013 whereby the licence of the petitioner in respect of the Fair Price Shop in question, has been suspended as well as the order dated 2.5.2013 whereby the licence of the petitioner in respect of the Fair Price Shop in question, has been cancelled. It is not disputed that the petitioner has got an alternative remedy of filing appeal before the Divisional Commissioner concerned against the aforesaid order dated 9.4.2013 suspending the licence of the petitioner in respect of the Fair Price Shop in question as well as the aforesaid order dated 2.5.2013 cancelling the licence of the petitioner in respect of the Fair Price Shop in question.
(3.) IN view of the availability of alternative remedy of filing appeal to the petitioner, we are not inclined to exercise our writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the present case.;