Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.;—

Heard Sri S.P. Giri learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The fair price shop licence of the petitioner was suspended on 24.12.2007 on the ground that during the spot inspection which was conducted on 21.12.2007, the fair price shop was found closed. It was further alleged that the petitioner had not distributed the essential commodities to the "Antyodaya" and "Below Poverty Line" Card Holders. The petitioner was issued a charge-sheet whereafter she submitted her explanation and the District Supply Officer passed an order on 28th March, 2008 cancelling the fair price shop licence of the petitioner on the ground that the evidence which has been filed by the petitioner appears to have been obtained from the card holders who have been won over to support the cause of the petitioner. It has further been held, that the entries in one Register made also appear to be in furtherance of this design of manipulating documents later on, as a result whereof the explanation given by the petitioner does not inspire confidence and consequently the licence has been cancelled.

3. The petitioner filed an appeal and took a specific ground to the effect that no evidence in rebuttal was coming forth to the affidavits filed on behalf of the petitioner and which was in relation to the same card holders who are alleged to have made the complaints. Inspite of this, the appellate authority has also erroneously affirmed the order of the District Supply Officer and the orders are vitiated.

4. Sri Giri has invited the attention of the Court to the affidavits that were filed by those very card holders who are alleged to have made the complaints. He therefore contends that the authorities below have committed a manifest error by disbelieving the same and this finding is based on surmises and conjectures.

5. I have perused the said affidavits. None of these affidavits state that no such complaints have ever been made. The affidavits simply say that the card holders have been getting their essential commodities and they shall have no complaint in future.

6. Sri Giri submits that the word 'future' (Bhavishya) has been used in the context of the past and the present, and therefore, it has been misconstrued and misread by the authorities. This argument by no stretch of imagination can be accepted, inasmuch as, the choice of words made in the affidavits clearly indicates that the past conduct of the petitioner was being condoned in the hope that the petitioner will not commit any such mistake in future. The affidavits therefore have rightly been construed by the authorities to be an afterthought. The card holders were won over with a view to provide a plausible explanation to the petitioner's defence. The Sales Register also appears to have been prepared in furtherance of the same design to set up a defence before the authority.

7. In such a situation, the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner cannot be accepted.

8. The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.

_____________

Click Here to Read the rest of this document