Desh Raj vs Commissioner Saharanpur and others

Sibghat Ullah Khan, J.

Heard Shri P.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondents.

This writ petition is directed against order dated 20.9.2010 passed by District Supply Officer, Muzaffarnagar. Proceedings were initiated against the petitioner who was licencee/agreement holder to distribute commodities on fair price. A news item was published to the effect that in the mid day meal prepared in a school insects were found. Petitioner had supplied food grains to the said school. On the basis of said report petitioner''s licence was first suspended thereafter cancelled through order dated 20.11.2009 passed by D.S.O., Muzaffar Nagar. Petitioner filed appeal in the form of appeal no. 6 of 200910 ? Desh Raj vs. State. Deputy Commissioner (Food), Saharanpur division, Saharanpur dismissed the appeal on 21.5.2010 hence this writ petition.

Counter affidavit has been filed in para4 of which it has been stated that pursuant to news item published in Dainik Jagran on 29.8.2009 inquiry was conducted by Regional Supply Officer, Budhana (District Muzaffar Nagar) who found that irregularities were committed by the petitioner in distributing essential commodities to the card holders and inferior and adulterated foods grains were supplied to the card holders. There was absolutely no complaint of any card holder. The allegation was not regarding inferior quality. The only allegation was that insects were found in the food and inference was sought to be drawn that insects found access to the food grains in the shop of the petitioner. The only possible allegation against the petitioner could be that there was carelessness in storing essential commodities. There is no allegation that petitioner had changed the essential commodities that he received from the Government. It is unfortunate that copy of the inquiry report has not been annexed alongwith counter affidavit. From para4 of the counter affidavit it is quite clear that the inquiry was confined only to the allegations of irregularities in distribution to Card holders. There is nothing in the counter affidavit to indicate that what was found in the inquiry regarding fault of the petitioner due to which insects entered in the food grains which was supplied to the school. There is no allegation that such insects could not have come due to carelessness in the storage by the school authorities.

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Impugned orders are set aside. Petitioner''s agreement/licence to distribute essential commodities stands restored with all necessary consequences including supply of food grains as was being done prior to suspension/cancellation of the petitioner''s licence.