Hon’ble Bala Krishna Narayan, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

2. The petitioner’s fare price shop licence was suspended by respondent No. 3 by order dated 23.12.2005 on the allegations that the petitioner had contravened the provisions of U.P. Scheduled Commodities Distribution Order, 2004 by charging excess amount for the essential commodities from the BPL card holders and Antodaya card holders. By the same order, the petitioner was also required to show cause as to why his agreement be not cancelled. The petitioner filed his reply to the show cause notice denying the allegations made against him and alongwith his reply, the petitioner also filed documents before respondent No. 3 for showing that the grounds on which the petitioner’s fair price shop agreement was sought to be cancelled were unfounded. After receiving petitioner’s reply, respondent No. 3 recorded the statements of some of the BPL and Antodaya card holders behind the back of the petitioner and without affording him any opportunity to cross examine the said witness and without furnishing him with the copies of their statements by his order dated 7.2.20