Ritu Raj Awasthi, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel and perused the records. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 6.3.2013 passed in Appeal No.527 of 2008-09 by the opposite party no.2, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition and the order dated 24.9.2008 passed by the opposite party no.3, as contained in Annexure No.4 to the writ petition.
(2.) As per the given facts of the case the petitioner was granted fair price shop license at village Puraina, Gram Panchayat Puraina, Vikas Khand and Tehsil Beeghapur, District Unnao. By the order dated 30.1.2009, the opposite party no.3 has suspended the agreement of fair price shop license of the said shop. It is alleged that no preliminary inquiry was made and no spot inspection was done before suspending the license of the petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the opposite party no.2 which was decided on 4.7.2008 whereby the appellate Court had remanded the matter back to the competent authority to decide it afresh by passing a reasoned and speaking order. It was thereafter that by the impugned order dated 24.9.2008, the agreement of fair price shop license was cancelled. The appeal preferred by the petitioner against the cancellation order was dismissed vide order dated 6.3.2013.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appellate court although has come to the conclusion that the inspection of the stock in the fair price shop in question was not done properly as the entire stock which was kept in two separate shops was not taken into consideration and the report was submitted considering the stock kept in one shop only, but has rejected the appeal on the ground that the progress in the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, is not available on record and in such a situation it is not possible for the appellate Court to take any decision, hence the appeal is rejected.;