The court emphasized the importance of fair and reasonable opportunity in compliance with the principles of natural justice for Fair Price Shop licensees before cancellation/suspension orders are passed.

Sangeeta Chandra, J.

Rejoinder affidavit filed today in Court is taken on record.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing of the order dated 17.10.2012 passed by the Respondent No. 3, Sub Divisional Officer, Chhibramau, District Kannauj cancelling the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner and the order dated 03.07.2013 passed by the Respondent No. 2, Additional Commissioner, Kanpur Division, Kanpur rejecting the appeal of the petitioner.

3. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that initially a preliminary fact finding inquiry was conducted by Naib Tehsildar, Chhibramau who submitted an on spot inspection report dated 11.06.2012 wherein he had recorded statements of cardholders that the petitioner did not distribute the Essential Commodities/Scheduled Commodities in accordance with law. For the past ten years the petitioner had been habitual of measuring/weighing the Scheduled Commodities irregularly and also charging higher price. The cardholders had refrained from complaining against the petitioner only because the petitioner had two sons who acted as village strongmen and the cardholders were afraid of them. The petitioner was required to get the distribution of Scheduled Commodities certified by the Village Administrative Committee consisting of Area Lekhpal and Gram Panchayat Secretary but he avoided getting signatures of the Village Administrative Committee and instead certified of his own the distribution by forging signatures of the members of Administrative Committee. He used to open the Fair Price Shop only for one day for distribution of the Scheduled Commodities and if a cardholder failed to appear on the particular day when the Fair Price Shop was opened, he would not be given any food-grain etc. or Scheduled Commodities after closure of the shop on second or third day. The petitioner was guilty of not only overpricing but also shortweighting the Scheduled Commodities and the kerosene was distributed only on a monthly basis. It was found by the Naib Tehsildar that the complaints mostly relating to shortfall in measuring and overpricing were correct by examination of Ration Cards of the cardholders of the village concerned.

4. On the basis of the said preliminary fact finding inquiry dated 11.06.2012 the Sub Divisional Magistrate had issued a show cause notice to the petitioner on 12th of June, 2012 in which he was asked to submit his Stock Register and other documents if he had any, in support of his case that the preliminary fact finding inquiry report was wrongly submitted by the Naib Tehsildar.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had submitted his explanation on 15.06.2012 along with affidavits of various villagers in support of his case. There was no complaint by the villagers against the petitioner but only because of election rivalry with the present Gram Pradhan, the petitioner was being harassed. A copy of the joint statements along with signatures of BPL and Antyodaya cardholders was also submitted in support of the petitioner's explanation and also the report of the officer concerned who was directed by the Sub Divisional Officer to certify the correct distribution of Essential Commodities was submitted by the petitioner.

6. It is the case of the petitioner that his explanation was not considered and an order was passed cancelling his Fair Price Shop Licence on 09.08.2012. Against such order dated 09.08.2012 the petitioner preferred an Appeal No. 374 of 2012 which was allowed by the Commissioner and the order dated 09.08.2012 was set aside only on the ground that the explanation submitted by the petitioner was not considered by the Sub Divisional Officer and only the preliminary fact finding report of Naib Tehsildar was relied upon in passing the order of cancellation of the Fair Price Shop licence.

7. After the appeal was allowed on 10.09.2012 and the matter was remanded to the Sub Divisional Officer concerned to give proper opp