Allahabad High Court
AFROZversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The appellate order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration because the petitioner’s reply and affidavits were not duly taken into account, violating natural justice.
Summary
The petitioner Afroz challenged the cancellation of his Fair Price Shop licence, contending that he had filed a five‑page explanation to the charges on 17 April 2018, which was duly certified but not placed on the licensing authority's file. The Appellate Authority dismissed his appeal on the basis that no reply had been filed and on the ground that the affidavits supporting his explanation were absent from the appeal record. The petitioner argued that the reply and the supporting affidavits were indeed on record and that the authority’s failure to consider them violated the principles of natural justice. The High Court examined the certification of the reply, noted the procedural lapse in not summoning the affidavits, and held that the appellant was prejudiced. Consequently, the Court set aside the appellate order dated 1 March 2019 and remitted the matter to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration within a specified time‑frame. The writ petition was disposed of with directions to file the affidavits and for the appellate authority to decide the appeal within three months thereafter.
Issues considered
- Whether the Appellate Authority erred in concluding that no reply was filed when a certified reply existed.
- Whether the Appellate Authority complied with natural justice by ignoring the affidavits annexed to the appeal.
- Whether the appellate order should be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.
Subjects
- Fair Price Shop licence
- cancellation
- appeal
- natural justice
- remand
- appellate authority
- writ petition
- procedural fairness
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 18189 of 2019
Afroz
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abdul Majeed, Kashif Gilani, Kushagra
Srivastava, Sanjay Singh, Shahrukh,
Sufia Saba
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui,
Ugrasen Kumar Pandey
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri Kushagra Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri
S.B. Singh, learned Standing Counsel for State.
2. After hearing learned counsel for petitioner, this Court finds that it is a
case of remand to Appellate Authority so that an appeal filed by petitioner
against cancellation of his fair price shop license be considered afresh on
following grounds :-
a. The petitioner is able to show from records that he has filed an
explanation to charges on 17.04.2018 running into 5 pages since a
certified copy of same is placed on record which has endorsement of
dated 19.04.2018 at office of concerned S.D.M., however, it appears that
it was not immediately placed on file of case, therefore, a finding returned
by Licensing Authority in the impugned order dated 02.05.2018 that no
reply was filed appears to be contrary to record.
b. The petitioner has taken a very specific ground in memo of appeal by
annexing photocopies of certified copy of reply that reply was already on
record. The Appellate Authority has taken note of it, however, since
explanation was entirely based on 14 affidavits of complainants who have
earlier made complaint against petitioner and details thereof were
mentioned in paragraph 3 of said reply, however, it appears that said
affidavits were not filed along with memo of appeal and that was the main
WRIC No. 18189 of 2019
2
reason due to which appeal was dismissed.
c. Even in such circumstances, Court finds that Appellate Authority can
summon records to verify whether affidavits were filed or not, however,
said exercise was not undertaken despite appeal is in continuity of first
order.
d. In view of above, Court finds that petitioner has been prejudiced and
principles of natural justice were not completely followed.
3. Accordingly, impugned appellate order dated 01.03.2019 is set aside
and matter is remitted back to concerned Appellate Authority for fresh
consideration. The petitioner is at liberty to file photocopies of affidavits
which are annexed with this writ petition or if necessary, fresh affidavits
can be filed. Said exercise shall be undertaken within 3 weeks.
4. Thereafter, concerned Appellate Authority will consider the same and
will call the records, if necessary, and will decide the appeal within 3
months thereafter.
5. Writ petition stands disposed of with above observations, liberty and
directions.
(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
September 17, 2026
N. Sinha
Digitally signed by :-
NIRMAL SINHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…