Preetam Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Judgment Rerserved on - 07.07.2025 Judgment Delivered on – 18.07.2025 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1098 of 2020 Petitioner :- Preetam Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶1The petitioner has preferred the present petition inter alia with the prayer to quash the order dated 05.03.2019/14.03.2019 passed by the respondent no. 3/District Supply Officer, Agra by which the fair price shop license of the petitioner has been cancelled. Aggrieved against the aforesaid, an appeal being Case No. 00793 of 2019 Computerized Case No. C201901000000793 Preetam Singh Vs. State of U.P. filed by the petitioner which was rejected by respondent no. 2/Commissioner (Food and Supply), Agra Division, Agra on 05.11.2019. Aggrieved against the aforesaid the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

¶2Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that fair price shop licence of the petitioner has been cancelled in violation of the provisions contained under the Government Order dated 05.08.2019 as well as provisions contained under the U.P. Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016. He next submitted that no preliminary enquiry has been conducted in the matter and the licence of the petitioner has been cancelled on misconceived grounds. He submitted that lodging of First Information Report under Section 3/7 of the U.P. Essential Commodities Act 1955 can not be a ground for the suspension or cancellation of the fair price shop licence unless there is proper enquiry in the matter He placed the reliance on the Full Bench Judgment of this Court passed in Misc. Single No. 8033 of 2013. D/d. 26.10.2017 Bajrangi Tiwari Vs. The Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda And Another in order to demonstrate that on the ground of lodging first information report, fair price shop licence cannot be cancelled in which following questions were referred to the Full Bench which reads as follows:- "1. Whether the fair price shop licence can be cancelled merely on lodging of a criminal case against the licencee?; and

¶2Whether, while passing any such order the Government Order dated 17.8.2002, particularly para-10 of said Government Order would be applicable/considered or not?"

¶3The answers of the aforesaid questions have been given by the Full Bench which reads as follows:-

(i) The answer is no. Licence of a fair price shop cannot be cancelled merely on lodging of FIR against the licencee.

(ii) The answer is no. The Government order dated 17.8.2002 relates to allotment of a fair price shop and hence the same cannot be referred to in suspension/cancellation of licence. It is the Government order dated

29.7.2014 according to which the suspension/cancellation of a fair price shop licence can take place.

¶4He submitted that in view of the violation of the mandatory provisions contained under the Government Order dated 05.08.2019 and the Control Order, 2016 the impugned orders can not be sustained and are liable to be set aside by this Court.

¶5It is argued that a writ petition was filed by one Amit Kumar being Writ C No.2029 of 2022 (Amit Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and others) before this Court and this Court taking into consideration the order passed by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Bajrangi Tiwari (supra) allowed the writ petition vide order dated

11.09.2024 holding therein that fair price shop license could not be cancelled merely on the ground of lodging of F.I.R. under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act. The order dated 11.09.2024 reads as follows:-

¶1Heard Sri Vishal Tandon, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ravindra Kumar Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶2Brief facts of the case are that petitioner was granted a licence for fair price shop and petitioner was running the fair price shop since long. Proceeding against the petitioner was initiated and the licence of the petitioner was cancelled vide order dated 26.12.2018. Appeal filed by petitioner against the cancellation order dated 26.12.2018 was also dismissed vide order dated

4.3.2021. Hence, this writ petition is filed for following reliefs:- "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 04.03.2021 passed by Joint Commissioner Food Saharanpur in appeal no.93/2020-21 and 94/2020-21 and order dated

26.12.2018 and 1.9.2018 passed by District Supply Inspector Muzaffar Nagar.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondent authorities to restore the fare price shop license in favour of the petitioner.

iii) Issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

¶3This Court vide order dated 11.02.2022 entertained the matter and directed the State to file counter affidavit.

¶4In pursuance of the order dated 11.02.2022 the pleadings have been exchanged between the parties.

¶5Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that fair price shop licence of the petitioner has been cancelled in violation of the provisions contained under the Government Order dated 05.08.2019 as well as provisions contained under the U.P. Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016. He next submitted that no preliminary enquiry has been conducted in the matter and the licence of the petitioner has been cancelled on mis-conceived grounds. He submitted that lodging of First Information Report under Section 3/7 of the U.P. Essential Commodities Act 1955 can not be a ground for the suspension or cancellation of the fair price shop licence unless there is proper enquiry in the matter He placed the reliance on the Full Bench Judgment of this Court passed in Misc. Single No. 8033 of 2013. D/d. 26.10.2017 Bajrangi Tiwari Vs. The Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda And Another in order to demonstrate that on the ground of lodging first information report, fair price shop licence cannot be cancelled. He submitted that in view of the violation of the mandatory provisions contained under the Government Order dated

05.08.2019 and the Control Order, 2016 the impugned orders can not be sustained and are liable to be set aside by this Court.

¶6Learned Standing Counsel for the State submitted that proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and it has been found that there was irregularity on the part of the petitioner regarding distribution of essential commodities to the cardholders, as such licence of the petitioner has rightly been cancelled. He submitted that criminal proceeding was also initiated against the petitioner and the First Information Report has been lodged under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Section 420 of Indian Penal Code as such no interference is required in the matter and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶7I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶8There is no dispute about the fact that petitioner was granted fair price shop licence by the Authorities. There is also no dispute about the fact that under the impugned order, the petitioner's licence has been cancelled and the appeal has also been dismissed.

¶9In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter a perusal of the Government Order dated 05.08.2019, which is applicable to Rural and Urban Area in respect to the suspension/cancellation of the fair price shop licence will be necessary which is as under: पቚኔषक, ओम पककाश वमकार, ववशቚኔष सवचिव, उ्ቈर पदቚኔश शकासन। सቚኔवका मम, 1-आययक, खका्ቕ एववं रसद ववभकाग, उ०प०। 2-समस्त जजिलकाजधिककारर, उ्ቈर पदቚኔश। 3-समस्त जजिलका पपूवतर अजधिककारर, उ्ቈर पदቚኔश। खका्ቕ एववं रसद अनयभकाग-6 लखनऊऊः वदनकावंक 05 अगस्त, 2019 ववषयऊः गकामरण एववं शहरर कቚኔ्ቔ ककी उवचित दर ककी दयककानोሪ कቚኔ वनलम्बन /वनरस्तरकरण एववं सम्बदरकरण कቚኔ सम्बन्धि मम पवቅኌयका कका वनधिकारण। महहोदय, उपययरक ववषयक लवकत सकावरजिवनक ववतरण पणकालर कቚኔ अन्तगरत ककायरत उवचित दर दयककानोሪ कቚኔ ववरूद पका्቎ वशककायतोሪ ककी जिकावंचि एववं तत्ቅኌम मम उनकቚኔ ववरुद सवंपकावदत ककी जिकानቚኔ वकालर ककायरवकावहयोሪ यथका वनलम्बन, वनरस्तरकरण एववं सम्बदरकरण कቚኔ सम्बन्धि मम समय-समय पर वववभ्ቐ शकासनकादቚኔशोሪ कቚኔ मकाध्यम सቚኔ वनदरश पसकाररत वकयቚኔ गयቚኔ हह। वतरमकान मम लकागपू रकाषषरय खका्ቕ सयरकका अजधिवनयम-2013 एववं तत्ቅኌम मम जिकारर उ्ቈर पदቚኔश आवश्यक वस्तय (ववቅኌय एववं ववतरण वनयवं्ቔण कका वववनयमन) आदेኔश-2016 तथा‌उ्ቈ र‌पदेኔश‌खादቕ ‌सुर+ा‌वनयमावली-2015 केኔ ‌पख् यापन‌तथा लाभाजथरयोሪ ‌को‌आवश् यक‌वस् तुओं‌केኔ ‌ववतरण‌मम‌तकनीकी‌अनुपयोग‌(पबबलक‌पोटरल‌पर‌सम् बद लाभाजथरयोሪ ‌का‌ऑनलाइन‌पदशरन‌एवं‌तद् नुसार‌आवंटन‌का‌सृजि न‌तथा‌ई०पी०ओ०एस० रमशीनोሪ ‌केኔ ‌माध् यम‌सेኔ‌करायेኔ‌जि ा‌रहेኔ‌ववतरण) तथा‌डोर‌स् टेኔप‌वडलीवरी‌का‌काय‌पचि जलत‌होनेኔ‌केኔ दृ वषगत‌पूवर‌मम‌वनगरत‌समस् त‌शासनादेኔशोሪ ‌को‌अवकኌ वमत‌करतेኔ‌हहयेኔ‌वतरमान‌पररदृ श् य‌मम‌वनम् नवत व् यवस् था‌वनवदरष‌वकयेኔ‌जि ानेኔ‌का‌मझु ेኔ‌वनदेኔश‌हहआ‌है:-1- उवचि त‌दर‌दकु ानोሪ ‌केኔ ‌ववरू द‌पा् ‌वशकायतोሪ ‌की‌जि ांचि -

(1) उवचि त‌दर‌ववकኌ ेኔ ताओं‌केኔ ‌ववरू द‌सामान् यतया‌आवश् यक‌वस् तुएएँ‌पा् ‌न‌होनेኔ , ववकኌ ेኔ ता‌दारा घटतौली‌वकयेኔ‌जि ानेኔ, अजधि क‌मूल् य‌जलयेኔ‌जि ानेኔ, एवं‌सूचि ी‌मम‌नाम‌न‌होनेኔ‌का‌बहाना‌बनाकर खादቕ ा्ቐ ‌न‌देኔनेኔ, ई-पपॉ स‌मशीन‌मम‌नेኔटवकर ‌न‌आनेኔ‌सवर ‌डाउन‌होनेኔ‌का‌बहाना‌बनाकर‌खादቕ ा्ቐ ववतरण‌केኔ ‌पूवर‌ही‌बायोमेኔवट्क‌पमाणीकरण‌कराकर‌लाभाजथरयोሪ ‌को‌वास् तव‌मम‌खादቕ ा्ቐ ‌न‌देኔकर र रकालाबाजि ारी‌कर‌लेኔनेኔ‌तथा‌यूवनट‌केኔ ‌सापेኔ+‌कम‌खादቕ ा्ቐ ‌देኔनेኔ , काड‌मम‌दजि ‌यूवनटोሪ ‌केኔ ‌सापेኔ+ कम‌यवनट‌केኔ ‌आधि ार‌फीड‌होनेኔ‌का‌आधि ार‌लेኔकर‌शेኔष‌यवनटोሪ ‌का‌खादቕ ा्ቐ ‌न‌देኔनेኔ, उपभोकाओंू ू सेኔ‌दव् यरवहार‌करनेኔ, समय‌सेኔ‌दकान‌न‌खोलनेኔ, आवश् यक‌सूचि नाओं‌का‌पदशरन‌न‌करनेኔ, आवदु ु वशकायतम‌पा् ‌होती‌ह।ै ‌वशकायत‌मुख् यतः‌मा०‌मुख् यमंतቔ ी‌हेኔल् प‌लाइन, ववभागीय‌टोल‌फी‌नम् बर कपॉ ल‌सेኔन् टर, आई०जि ी०आर०एस०, तहसील‌वदवस, उप‌जजि लाजधि कारी, जजि ला‌पूवतर‌अजधि कारी, मजजि लाजधि कारी, मण् डलायकु , खादቕ ायकु ‌एवं‌शासन‌पर‌जलजखत‌म‌डाक‌दारा, व् यवकगत‌रू प‌सेኔ एवं‌दरभाष‌पर‌पा् ‌होती‌ह।ह ‌वशकायतकतार‌मख्ु यतः‌तीन‌पकार‌केኔ ‌हो‌सकतेኔ‌हह , यथा‌वववशषू व् यवक, सम् बबन् धि त‌उवचि त‌दर‌ववकኌ ेኔ ता‌सेኔ‌सम् बद‌काडरधि ारक‌एवं‌सम् बबन् धि त‌उवचि त‌दर‌ववकኌ ेኔ ता‌सेኔ सम् बद‌लाभाजथरयोሪ ‌सेኔ‌वभ्ቐ ‌अन् य‌शोत/व् यवकयोሪ ‌केኔ ‌स् तर‌सेኔ‌पा् ‌वशकायतम। र म(2) उपरोकानुसार‌पा् ‌होनेኔ‌वाली‌वशकायतोሪ ‌पर‌कायवाही‌जि ाएँचि ‌केኔ ‌सम् बन् धि ‌म‌वनम् नवत‌पवकኌ या अपनायी‌जि ायेኔ-

(क) वववशष‌व् यवकयोሪ ‌सेኔ‌पा् ‌वशकायती‌पतቔ ोሪ ‌केኔ ‌सम् बन् धि ‌मम‌कायरवाही‌आरम् भ‌करनेኔ‌सेኔ‌पूवर सम् बबन् धि त‌वववशष‌व् यवक‌को‌पतቔ ‌भेኔजि कर‌यह‌पुवष‌कर‌ली‌जि ाय‌वक‌पतቔ ‌उन् हीሻ ‌केኔ ‌दारा म महस् ता+ररत‌ह‌ै और‌वशकायतोሪ ‌केኔ ‌सम् बन् धि ‌म‌उनको‌समाधि ान‌हो‌गया‌वक‌वशकायत‌तथ् योሪ ‌पर आधि ाररत‌ह।ह

(ख) सम्बबन्धित उवचित दर ववቅኌቚኔतका सቚኔ सम्बद ककाडरधिकारकोሪ कቚኔ स्तर सቚኔ पका्቎ वशककायतोሪ पर ककायरवकाहर सቚኔ पपूवर वशककायतोሪ ककी पकारबम्भक जिकाएँचि ककी जिकाए। उवचित दर दयककानोሪ कቚኔ ववरूद जिकाएँचि पवቅኌयका कቚኔ दतौरकान ववቅኌቚኔतका दकारका ई-पपॉस कቚኔ मकाध्यम सቚኔ वकयቚኔ गयቚኔ ववतरण कका वववरण (एम०आई०एस० ररपहोरर) जिहो पबबलक पहोररल पर उपलबधि हह, कका सवंजकान अवश्य जलयका जिकाय। ववቅኌቚኔतका दकारका पदवशरत ववतरण कका वमलकान ककाडरधिकारकोሪ कቚኔ रकाशन ककाडर मम दयककानदकारोሪ दकारका ककी गयर पवववषयोሪ सቚኔ भर वकयका जिका सकतका हह। सकाथ हर वशककायतकतकार व अन्य सम्बबन्धित पकोሪ कका कथन अवंवकत करतቚኔ समय उनकका पवतपररकण भर अवश्य वकयका जिकायቚኔ तकावक जिकाएँचि ककायरवकाहर ककी वनष्पकतका पथम दृषयका स्थकावपत हहो एववं अनकावश्यक जलवरगቚኔशन ककी बस्थवत उत्प्ቐ न हहो। (ग) अन्य सहोतोሪ/व्यवकयोሪ सቚኔ पका्቎ वशककायतोሪ कቚኔ सम्बन्धि मम यवद वशककायतर प्ቔ शपथ प्ቔ सቚኔ समजथरत नहीሻ हह, तहो वशककायतकतकार सቚኔ इस बकारቚኔ मम एक शपथ प्ቔ उपलबधि करकानቚኔ कहो कहका जिकाए और शपथ प्ቔ पका्቎ हहोनቚኔ कቚኔ उपरकान्त हर आगቚኔ ककी ककायरवकाहर ककी जिकाए।

(घ) उवचित दर ववቅኌቚኔतका कቚኔ ववरूद वकसर एक यका अत्यन्त अल्प सवंख्यका मम उपभहोककाओवं दकारका उवचित दर ववቅኌቚኔतका ककी दयककान पर जिकानቚኔ कቚኔ बकावजिपूद अपनका अनयमन्य खका्ቕका्ቐ पका्቎ न हहोनቚኔ ककी बस्थवत मम वቚኔ अपनर वशककायत जजिलका वशककायत वनवकारण अजधिककारर कቚኔ समक भर दजिर करका सकतቚኔ हह, जिहो वनधिकाररत पवቅኌयका कका पकालन करतቚኔ हहए पकरण कቚኔ पररकणहोपरकान्त उसककी वनयमकानयसकार हकदकारर/खका्ቕ सयरकका भ्ቈका वदलकायका जिकानका सयवनबश्चित करमगቚኔ।"

¶10A perusal of the Government Order as quoted above fully demonstrates that preliminary inquiry is to be conducted by the Authorities before suspension/cancellation of the fair price shop licence of the licence holder.

¶11Perusal of the aforesaid Government Order dated 05.08.2019 as well as impugned orders and other evidence on record reveals that procedure prescribed under the Government Order has not been followed by the authority and the licence of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground that first information report has been lodged against the petitioner under Section 3/7 of the U.P. Essential Commodities Act and Section 420 of Indian Penal Code. In full Bench judgment of this Court in Bajrangi Tiwari (Supra) it has been clearly held that fair price shop can not be cancelled merely on the ground of lodging criminal case.

¶12Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as the ratio of law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Bajrangi Tiwari (Supra) impugned order dated 26.12.2018 passed by the respondent no. 3 and appellate order dated 4.3.2021 passed by the respondent no. 2 are liable to be set aside and the same are hereby set aside.

¶13The writ petition stands allowed and the respondents are directed to restore the fair price shop licence of the petitioner forthwith.

¶14No order as to costs.

¶6The aforesaid order was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by one Mohd. Amir by filing Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.25501 of 2024 (Mohd. Amir Vs. State of U.P. and others) and the aforesaid S.LP. was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 21.04.2025. The order dated 21.04.2025 reads as follows:-

¶1We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgement and order of the High Court; hence, the special leave petitions are dismissed.

¶2Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶7Learned Standing Counsel for the State submitted that proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and it has been found that there was irregularity on the part of the petitioner regarding distribution of essential commodities to the cardholders, as such licence of the petitioner has rightly been cancelled. He submitted that criminal proceeding was also initiated against the petitioner and the First Information Report has been lodged under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 66D of I.T. (Amendment) Act 2008, as such no interference is required in the matter and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶8I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶9Since pure question of law is involved in the present writ petition as such with the consent of counsel for the parties, present writ petition is being decided at the admission stage itself.

¶10There is no dispute about the fact that petitioner was granted fair price shop licence by the Authorities and the same has been cancelled, against which appeal has been filed and the same has also been dismissed.

¶11A perusal of the Government Order as quoted above fully demonstrates that preliminary inquiry is to be conducted by the Authorities before suspension/cancellation of the fair price shop licence of the licence holder.

¶12Perusal of the aforesaid Government Order dated 05.08.2019 as well as impugned orders and other evidence on record reveals that procedure prescribed under the Government Order has not been followed by the authority and the fair price shop licence of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground that first information report has been lodged against the petitioner under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 66D of I.T. (Amendment) Act 2008. In full Bench judgment of this Court in Bajrangi Tiwari (Supra) it has been clearly held that fair price shop license can not be cancelled merely on the ground of lodging of criminal case.

¶13Apart from the same, very recently a detailed judgement has been delivered by this Court in bunch of cases leading Writ C No. 38609 of 2019 (M/S Sajid Vs. State of U.P. and 2 other) along-with 21 connected writ petitions on 10.06.2025. Against which several Special Leave Petitions were filed by the subsequent allottees, which was numbered as Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s).34331 of 2025 (Farhana Vs. State of U.P.) was filed before the Apex Court, which were dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide judgement and order dated 03.07.2025. The order dated 03.07.2025 reads as follows :- "1. Permission to file SLP(s) is granted.

¶2Delay condoned.

¶3Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s).

¶4We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment passed by the High Court. Hence, the Special Leave Petitions are dismissed.

¶5Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of."

¶14This fact is also admitted by the counsel for the parties.

¶15The Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Bajrangi Tiwari (Supra) held that license of fair price shop cannot be cancelled merely on the ground of lodging criminal case. The aforesaid law has been again reaffirmed by this Court in the case of Amit Kumar (supra) which has also been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohd. Amir (supra) as well as in the case of M/s Sajid (supra) which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Special Leave Petition filed by Farhana (supra).

¶16In view of the above discussion, the Court is of the opinion that the fair price shop licence/agreement could not be cancelled on the ground of registration of F.I.R. under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act.

¶17In this view of the matter, impugned order dated 05.03.2019/14.03.2019 passed by the respondent no. 3/District Supply Officer, Agra & order dated 05.11.2019 passed by respondent no. 2/Commissioner (Food and Supply), Agra Division, Agra, are liable to be set aside and the same are hereby set aside.

¶18The writ petition is allowed and the concerned-respondents are directed to restore the fair price shop licence of the petitioner forthwith. Order Date :-18.07.2025 Arti High Court of Judicature at Allahabad