Hon’ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J.—Heard Sri S.C. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vishal Tandon, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Diwakar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the present case are that on complaint of respondent No. 4, action was initiated by the respondent No. 2 against the petitioner’s fair price shop agency. By order dated 29.12.2015, fair price shop agreement of the petitioner was suspended and charge-sheet dated 8.1.2016 was issued requiring the petitioner to submit explanation. The petitioner submitted detailed explanation. However, by a brief order dated 10.3.2016, respondent No. 2 restored the fair price shop agreement of the petitioner as under:

^^vkns'k &

Jh uhjt dqekj feJ mfpr nj fodzsrk xzke iapk;r cjh fodkl [k.M m:ok rglhy estk ds forj.k dh izkIr f'kdk;r dh tkap {ks=h; [kk| vf/kdkjh estk ls djkbZ x;hA {ks=h; [kk| vf/kdkjh estk dh tkap vk[;k fnukad 29-12-15 }kjk ;g ik;k x;k fd mDr fodzsrk vko';d oLrqvksa ds forj.k esa vfu;ferrk cjrus dk nks"kh gSA vr,o bl dk;kZy; ds i=kad 299 fnukad 29-12-15 }kjk mDr fodzsrk dh nqdku dk vuqcU/k i= fuyfEcr dj fn;k x;k rFkk bl dk;