RITU RAJ AWASTHI, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel and perused the records. The writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 19.6.2012 passed by the opposite party no.2 as well as the order dated 11.1.2011 passed by the opposite party no. 3 whereby the fair price shop license of the petitioner has been cancelled and the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 28 (3) of Essential Commodities Distribution Order 2004, has been dismissed.
(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the order of cancellation has been passed in a most arbitrary and illegal manner without proving the allegation against the petitioner.
(3.) It is submitted that on the basis of a complaint the fair price shop license of the petitioner was suspended and show cause notice was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to submit his reply. The petitioner submitted his reply denying the allegation. In the reply it was specifically pleaded that the supply of wheat for A.P.L. card holders was short due to which the required quantity of 10 Kg. wheat per card holder to A.P.L. card holders could not be made. The impugned order has been passed relying on the statement of certain card holders who have stated that they have either not received any wheat or have received less wheat in the months of September, October and November, 2010.;