SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(All) 922

SUNIL AMBWANI
DHARMENDRA KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Deepak Kumar Jaiswal and D.S. Srivastava for the Petitioner; S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Sunil Ambwani, J.—Heard Shri Deepak Kumar Jaiswal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

2. The petitioner’s father was appointed an authorised dealer of fair price shop in the year 1976 under a contract with the State of U.P. The distribution is now regulated by the U.P. Scheduled Commodities (Distribution) Order, 2004. His shop is situate in Katra, a busy commercial locality in the city of Allahabad. In the year 1993 the shop was transferred to the petitioner.

3. The shop was inspected by an inspecting party of the civil supplies department on 10.2.2005. It is alleged that stocks were found to be correct but the inspecting party took away the sales register of the period 1.8.2004 to 31.1.2005. The petitioner, however, was not given the receipts, either on the same day or on the next day, when he met the Addl. District Magistrate. In the inspection note it was stated that the stock and rate board was not displayed, and that not a single card holder was present, whereas the dealer had entered a good amount of kerosene oil distributed on that day upto the time of inspection. On that date 13 fair price shops were inspected between 11.50 a.m. t








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top