ARUN PALLI, J. - (1.) THE appellant happened to be a Wholesale Kerosene Dealer. A licence, under the Punjab Light Diesel Oil and Kerosene Dealers Licensing Order, 1978 [for short, 'the Licensing Order'], was issued to the appellant, for distribution of kerosene oil to the retail dealers.
(2.) A complaint was made by a depot holder, namely, Surinder Kumar, that 150 kilolitres of kerosene oil was allocated to the appellant for distribution to local depot holders/licensee/cooperative societies, however, the same was never distributed. The competent authority i.e. the District Controller, having taken cognizance of the matter, in exercise of power under Section 10 read with Section 2C of the Licensing Order, suspended the licence of the appellant, vide order dated 8th July, 2010. Having suspended the licence, the District Controller, with a purpose to afford personal hearing to the appellant, posted the matter for 15th July, 2010. Accordingly, the appellant was asked to appear along with the proof, in support of his defence. As is made out from the records, the appellant appeared before respondent No.3 on the appointed date i.e. 15th July, 2010, and requested for time to file suitable reply. The request was acceded to and the matter was, accordingly, kept for 21st July, 2010. The appellant submitted his reply and the matter was deferred to 29th July, 2010, to hear the complainant. Since the complainant did not chose to be present on the date fixed, the hearing was deferred for 9th September, 2010, with a direction to the appellant to appear along with the original records (copies of the main register etc.). Although, the appellant appeared on the date fixed i.e. 9th September, 2010, however, failed to produce the original records, as so directed. Rather, presented a photo copy of the information dated 9th July, 2010, given to the Police Station City Batala alleging misplacement of record.
(3.) THE District Controller, on consideration of the matter, inter alia, was of the view that the licence of the appellant was suspended on 8th July, 2010 and on the following day i.e. 9th July, 2010, the appellant approached the police authority to inform qua the alleged loss or misplacement of original records. This, in view of the authority, was just a cover up post - suspension to avoid the inquiry. It was observed, that had the appellant actually lost or misplaced the original records, it would have intimated the respondent No.3 immediately. Nothing in this regard was conveyed even on 21st July, 2010, during the course of personal hearing. Although, the information to the police was given on 9th July, 2010, but the alleged misplacement of the original records was reported, for the first time, to the District Controller on 9th September, 2010 i.e. after two months. This, proved that the records had not actually been misplaced rather the Dealer had made an effort to mislead the department by hatching a conspiracy. Thus, the District Controller, cancelled the kerosene oil licence of the appellant.;