JUDGMENT :

1. Heard, Shri O.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr.Krishna Singh, learned Standing Counsel through Video Conferencing.

2. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 04.07.2019, passed by the opposite party no.3 i.e. the District Supply Officer, District-Unnao by means of which the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner has been cancelled and the appellate order dated 08.11.2019, passed by the opposite party no.2 i.e. the Joint Commissioner (Food), Lucknow Division, Lucknow.

3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner was suspended by means of order dated 25.08.2018 and the petitioner was directed to submit his reply. After considering reply submitted by the petitioner the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner was restored vide order dated 05.10.2018 as the complaint against the petitioner was not found sustainable and there was an enmity between the family of petitioner and the husband of Gram Pradhan. Thereafter another complaint was made on 10.12.2018 and the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner was suspended by means of order dated 24.01.2019 and a charge sheet was served to the petitioner on 31.01.2019, but the copy of the complaint and the statements of alleged card holders alleged to have been recorded in the inquiry and enquiry report were not provided to the petitioner. The petitioner had preferred an application for providing him a copy of the complaint and copy of the inquiry report on 06.02.2019, but without considering the same and affording any opportunity to the petitioner the impugned order dated 4th July, 2019 was passed by means of which the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner has been cancelled. The petitioner had preferred an appeal, but without considering the grounds raised by the petitioner the appeal has been dismissed by means of order dated 08.11.2019. Therefore the petitioner has constrained to approach this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the inquiry has been conducted in gross violation of law, principles of natural justice and various Government Orders. Therefore the impugned orders are not sustainable and are liable to the quashed.

5. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the petitioner was afforded opportunity to submit reply while issuing the charge sheet and the petitioner should have submitted his complete reply. He further submitted that after considering the statements of various card holders, the finding has been recorded that the petitioner was misbehaving with the card holders and was not distributing the essential commodities. The petitioner also could not produce any evidence in support of his reply, therefore the Fair Price Shop licence of the petitioner has rightly been cancelled and the appeal of the petitioner has been rejected. There is no illegality or error in the action taken against the petitioner.

6. I have considered the submissions of learned counsels of the parties and perused the record.

7. It appears from the record that a complaint was made against the petitioner on 25.08.2018 and on the same date the Fair Price Shop Licence of the petitioner was suspended on the basis of the statements of 22 card holders. The petitioner had submitted his reply and after considering the reply, the Fair Price Shop Licence of the petitioner was restored by means of order dated 05.10.2018 and a finding was recorded that there is a family enmity between the husband of the Pradhan and the Fair Price Shop Dealer i.e. the petitioner. The Fair Price Shop Licence of the petitioner was again suspended on a complaint dated 10.12.2018 by means of order dated 24.01.2019. A charge sheet was issued on 31.01.2019. Perusal of the suspension order and the charge sheet indicates that no documents were annexed alongwith the same. The petitioner had submitted an application on 06.02.2019 for providing him a copy of the complaint and the inquiry report, but