Allahabad High Court
ASALAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The appellate authority's order is set aside and the matter is remitted for a fresh order within three months.
Summary
The petitioner challenged the cancellation of his fair price shop licence by the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate and the subsequent rejection of his appeal by the Additional Commissioner. The licence was cancelled on the basis of statements from 40 card‑holders alleging irregularities, but the petitioner submitted affidavits from 32 of those complainants withdrawing their allegations and argued that five of the complainants were not card‑holders of his shop. The court observed that the licensing and appellate authorities neither examined the petitioner’s explanations nor verified the remaining complaints, and they failed to provide specific reasons for rejecting the defence. Accordingly, the appellate authority’s order dated 07‑07‑2026 was set aside and the matter remitted for a fresh order within three months, taking note of the observations made. The writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the cancellation of the fair price shop licence was valid in view of the petitioner's explanation and affidavits.
- Whether the appellate authority erred in rejecting the petitioner's explanation without giving specific reasons.
- Whether the authorities were required to verify the statements of the remaining card‑holders before confirming the cancellation.
- Whether the appellate authority's order should be set aside and the case remitted for fresh consideration.
Subjects
- fair price shop licence
- licence cancellation
- appeal remand
- verification of complaints
- administrative law
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 37567 of 2026
Asalam
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Umesh Prasad Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri Shaurya Sharma, Advocate holding brief of Sri U.P. Singh,
learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, learned
Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-Respondents.
2. Petitioner has come up before this Court challenging order dated
26.02.2026 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Billair, District
Kanpur Nagar, whereby fair price shop licence of petitioner was cancelled
and challenging order dated 07.07.2026 passed by Additional Commissioner
Administration, Kanpur Division, whereby petitioner's appeal against
aforesaid order was rejected.
3. After hearing learned counsel for parties, Court finds that due to following
reasons a case of remand is made out that Appellate Authority may hear
appeal afresh:
(a) Petitioner's fair price shop licence was cancelled onground that during
inspection 40 card holders have given their respective statements that there
were certain irregularities in distribution of essential commodities, however,
when explanation was filed by petitioner, affidavits of 32 such card holders
or their close relatives were submitted that complaints were made under
wrong impression. The contents of affidavits were verified also and
deponents thereof have remained consistent on the contents made in
affidavits, still impugned orders were passed rejecting said explanation
WRIC No. 37567 of 2026
2
without any specific reason.
(b) Petitioner has made a specific statement that out of 40 persons, who have
made complaints against licensee, at least 5 persons were not card holders of
petitioner's shop, which has not been denied or no specific finding was
returned against said submission either by Licensing Authority or by
Appellate Authority.
(c) Licensing Authority or Appellate Authority have also not taken steps to
verify the statements of remaining card holders, whether they still repeats the
contents of complaint.
(d) It may be a case that some of the deponents who have given affidavits in
favour of petitioner were not the complainants or the persons, whose
statements were recorded, but without verifying from said card holders, the
affidavits may not be rejected outrightly.
(e) The Court also takes note that Appellate Authority has passed order
essential in its paragraph no. 4, which is running in more than five pages and
probably the facts are mixed.
4. In aforesaid circumstances, impugned order dated 07.07.2026 passed by
Appellate Authority is hereby set aside and matter is remitted to pass a fresh
order within a period of three months from today taking note of observations
made hereinabove.
5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
September 18, 2026
AK
(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
AWADESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…