Mahendra Pal Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 23631 of 2017 Mahendra Pal Singh …..Petitioner(s) Versus State of U.P. and 3 others …..Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar, Anoop Kumar Mishra, Praneet Kumar Srivastava, Sunil Kumar Yadav, Vishvajit Tiwari, Vivek Saran (elevated), Yashpal Yadav, Yogesh Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Reserved on 23.9.2026 Delivered on 1.10.2026 Court No. - 36 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

¶1This case is arising out of orders passed under U.P. Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016, whereby fair price shop license issued to the petitioner was cancelled vide an order dated

30.9.2014, passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Etah. An appeal thereof of was dismissed vide an order dated 20.12.2016, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Aligarh.

¶2According to records, on basis of complaints, an inquiry was conducted by the Regional Food Officer and an inspection of fair price shop of petitioner was conducted on 19.8.2014, wherein statements of more than 20 card holders were recorded alleging that there were repeated irregularities in the distribution of essential commodities, since it was not provided on monthly basis. The petitioner used to charge more money, therefore, fair price shop license issued in favour of the petitioner was suspended vide an order dated

19.8.2014 and petitioner was asked to submit reply.

¶3Petitioner submitted reply on 30.8.2014 that all the complaints made against him were false. The inquiry report was based only on basis of statements of card holders, therefore, it was a secondary evidence. The concerned Officer has examined the distribution of essential commodities of every month and has put signatures also. Petitioner also submitted distribution register for the month of July and August, 2014.

¶4The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Aligarh examined the statements of card holders and explanation submitted by the petitioner, but it was found unsatisfactory, therefore, vide an order dated 30.9.2014 license issued to the petitioner was cancelled. Relevant part thereof is mentioned hereinafter: "

विक्रेताद्वाराप्रस्तुतस्पष्टीकरणतथाजाँचकेदौरानविक्रेताकेविरूद्धप्राप्त

अनियमितताओंकातुलनात्मकपरीक्षणकियागया।अनुशीलनोपरान्तयहपायागया

कि विक्रेताद्वाराअपनेकथनकेसमर्थनमेंमाहजुलाईवअगस्त

2014

केवितरण

रजिस्टरप्रस्तुतकियेगयेहैं

,

जबकि विक्रेतापरमाहजुलाईकेपूर्वकेमाहोंके

सम्बन्धमेंभीआरोपहै।विक्रेताद्वाराप्रस्तुतमाहजुलाई

2014

केवितरणरजिस्टर

अप्रमाणितहैजबकि अनुबन्धपत्रकीधारा

मेंयहस्पष्टप्राविधानितहैकि उचित

दरविक्रेताकेवहीस्टाकववितरणरजिस्टरमान्यहोंगेजोपूर्ति निरीक्षकद्वारा

प्रमाणितहोंगे।पुनःमाहजुलाई

2014

केवितरणरजिस्टरपरमात्रमात्राकाअंकन

है।विक्रेताद्वाराअपनेस्पष्टीकरणमेंबार

-

बारशिकायतकर्ताओंकेअनुचितमाँगोंकी

पूर्तिपूर्ति नकरनेतथापार्टीबन्दीएवंराजनैतिकद्वेषभावनाकोशिकायतकामूल

आधारबतायागयाहै

,

जोनिराधारहै।इसप्रकारविक्रेताद्वाराप्रस्तुतस्पष्टीकरण

सन्तोषजनकनहींपायागया।

इसप्रकारइसतथ्यकीपुष्टिहोनेपरविक्रेताश्रीमहेन्द्रपालसिंहग्रामलालपुर

जहाँगीराबादद्वाराआवश्यकवस्तुओंकावितरणलाभार्थियोंमेंनियमानुसारनकर

उसकानिजीहितमेंदुरूपयोगकियागयाहैजोअनुसूचितवस्तुवितरणआदेश 2004

तथाअनुबन्धपत्रकीशर्तोकास्पष्टउल्लंघनहैजिसकेदृष्टिगतश्रीमहेन्द्रपाल

सिंहउचितदरविक्रेताग्रामलालपुरजहांगीराबादकीदुकानकाअनुबन्धबनाये

रखनाजनहितकेसर्वथाप्रतिकूलहै।अतःउपरोक्तकेदृष्टिगतश्रीमहेन्द्रपालसिंह

उचितदरविक्रेताग्रामलालपुरजहांगीराबादविकासखण्डशासनकेपक्षमेंजब्त

करतेहुयेतत्कालप्रभावसेनिरस्तकियाजाताहै।

¶5The petitioner thereafter filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority however it was dismissed vide an order dated 20.12.2016. Relevant part of the said order is reproduced hereinafter: "

उभयपक्षोंकेविद्वानअधिवक्ताओंकीतर्कपूर्णबहसकोसुनागयातथाअवर

न्यायालयकीपत्रावलीपरउपलब्धसमस्तसाक्ष्योंकागहनताकेसाथपरिशीलन

किया।अवरन्यायालयकीपत्रावलीकेअवलोकनसेयहविदितहोताहैकि विक्रेता

केविरुद्धनिलम्बन/

निरस्तीकरणकीकार्यवाहीशिकायतकर्ताजितेन्द्रसिंह, विश्राम सिंह,

राकेशकुमारआदि निवासीगणलालपुरजहाँगीराबाद,

वि०ख०जैथराद्वारा

प्रस्तुतशिकायतकेदृष्टिगतक्षेत्रीयखाद्यअधिकारी,

अलीगंजद्वाराप्रस्तुतजांच

आख्यादिनांक16.06.2014

केआधारपरप्रारम्भहुई।अवरन्यायालय/ उप WRICoNo.o-o23631oofo2017 जि जलाधि धकारी, oअलीगंजoद्व ाराoवि दनांक-19.06.2014 oकोoअपीलाथरo कीoदकु ानoका अनुबन् धoपत्र oकोoवि नलस्बि म् बतoवि कयाoगयाoतथाoपन् द्र हoवि दवसoके oअन् तगरतoस् पष्ट ीकरण साቌ्ष यoसवि हतoप्र स् तुतoकरनेoहेतुoवि नदरणि शतoवि कया।oअपीलाथरo/oउधि चतoदरoवि वቅ्र े ताoद्व ारा अवरoन् यायालयoमेंoस् पष्ट ीकरणoकोoप्र स् तुतoवि कया।oअपीलाथरoद्व ाराoस् पष्ट ीकरणoके oसाथ ऐसाoकोईoभीoठोसoसाቌ्ष यoप्र स् तुतoनहीं oवि कयाoहैoजि जससेoउसके oकथन्oकोoबलoवि मलता। तP्न सारoअवरoन् यायालयoद्व ाराoवि वቅ्र े ताoकोoवि नयमानुसारoआवश् यकoवस् तुओoं काoवि वतरणु नoकरoगम् भीरoअवि नयवि मतताओoं काoदोषीoपातेoहुएoअपीलाथरoकीoदकु ानoके oअनुबन् धपत्र कोoआदशे oवि दनांकo30.09.2014oके oद्व ाराoवि नरस् तoवि कयाoह,ै oजोoसवरथाoवि वधि धoसम् मतoह।ै o अपीलाथरo द्व ाराoजरू रतमन् दoकाडरo धारकों o कोoआवश् यकoवस् तुओंoके oवि वतरणoमें अवि नयवि मतताoबरतoकरoउधि चतoदरoकीoदकानoसंचालि लतoवि कयेoजानेoहेतुoवि दयेoगयेु लाईसेंसoकाoउद् ेश् यoवि वफलoवि कयाoगया।oअवरoन् यायालयoकीoपत्र ावलीoपरoउपलब् ध जांचoआख् याoवि दनांकo16.06.2014oके oअवलोकनoसेoयहoवि ववि दतoहोताoहैoवि कoवि वቅ्र े ता द्व ाराoआवश् यकoवस् तुओंoकाoवि वतरणoवि नयमानुसारoनहीं oवि कयाoजाoरहाoहै,oचीनीoका वि वतरणoमात्र oत् यौहारों oपरoवि कयाoगयाoह,ै oवि वतरणoवि नधारि रतoदरoसेoअधि धकoदरoपरoवि कया जाताoह।ै oवि वቅ्र े ताoके oवि वरू द्ध oकईoकाडरधारकों oनेoअपने-अपनेoबयानoजांचoअधि धकारीoको अंवि कतoकरायेoतथाoजांचoअधि धकारीoद्व ाराoअपनीoजांचoआख् याoमेंoवि वቅ्र े ताoकोoदोषीoपाते हुएoअवरoन् यायालयoमेंo अपनीoआख् याoप्र स् तुतoकी, oजि जससेoयहoस् पष्ट o हैoवि क अपीलाथर/उधि चतoदरoवि वቅ्र े ताoमहेन् द्र पालoसिं सहoद्व ाराoआवश् यकoवस् तुओoं के oवि वतरणoमें अवि नयवि मतताoबरतीoगईoतथाoउपभोक्त ाओoं कोoआवश् यकoवस् तुओoं काoवि नयवि मतoवि वतरण नoकरoगम् भीरoअवि नयवि मतताoबरतीoगई।o यहाएoयहoभीoउ्ल ेखoकरनाoआवश् यकoहैoवि कoयवि दoवहoअपनाoस् पष्ट ीकरणoऔरoसाथoही प्र ाधि धकारि रयों oद्व ाराoयथाoअपेधि क्ष तoऐसेoसभीoदस् तावेजों oकोoदालि खलoकरनेoमoें वि वफलoहो जाताoहैoतोoप्र ाधि धकारीoसमधिु चतoआदेशों oकोoपारि रतoकरनेoके oलि लएoभलीoभाएधि तoअपने अधि धकारोoके oभीतरoहीoह।ै oवतरमानoवादoमें,oयाचीoके oवि वरू द्ध oआरोपoइसoप्र कारoथेoवि क उसनेoकाडरoधारकों oकोoआवश् यकoवस् तुएंoवि वतरि रतoनहीं oकीoहैoजि जसके oलि लएoएकoमात्र सबूतoजि जसके oद्व ाराoप्र दानoवि कयाoजाoसकताoहै,oस् कन् धoपंजीoऔरoअन् यoदस् तावेजoहैं जि जनसेoयहoपताoचलताoहैoवि कoऐसाoसविं वतरणoवि कयाoगयाoह।ै oउसके oएकoबारoअणि भलेख कोoपेशoकरनेoमेंoअसफलoहोoजानेoपरoइसoअप्र धि तरोध् यoवि नष् कषरoकोoवि नकालाoजाoसकता हoै वि कoउसके oवि वरू द्ध oआरोपoसहीoह।ै o oवि व्य मानoपरि रस्बि स् थधि तयों oमoेंo,ooमेरीoरायoमoेंo,ooमामलेoमेंoपूणरू पेणoजाएचoकाoआदशे oकरनेoकीo oकोईoआवश् यकताoनहीं oहoo,ै ooक् यों वि कoकायरवावि हयाएoसंधि क्ष ्त oप्र कृ धि तoकीoह।ै oतथावि पoo'oयवि क्त यक्त oु ु मल्ू यoपरoवि नधरनों oकोoआवश् यकoवस् तुओंoके oसंवि वतरणoहेतुoसरकारीoसस् तेoग्ल ेoकी oदकानoबनायीoगईoह।ै oआवश् यकoवस् तुओंoके oलि लएoअधि तरि रक्त o धनराणि शo कोoलेनाoo,ु आवश् यक o वस् तुओंo के o संवि वतरण o मेंo अवि नयवि मतताओंo को o कारि रत o करना o तथा कालाबाजारीoकरनेoसेoसरकारीoसस् तेoग्ल ेoकीoदकानoकोoचलानेoके oलि लएoप्र द्तु अनुज्ञ वि ्त oकाoउद् ेश् यoहीoवि वफलoहोoजायेगा।oप्र त् येकoवि ववि नश्च यoकोoनसै र्गि गकoन् यायoके वि नयमों oकीoपरि रधि धoके oअधीनoतबoतकoनहीं oलायाoजाoसकताoहैoजबoतकoवि कoपक्ष कारों द्व ाराoयहoदर्थि शतoनoवि कयाoजायेoवि कoउक्त oवि नयमों oकाoपालनoनoकरनेoसेoउसoपरoप्र धि तकू ल प्र भावoकारि रतoहोगा।oअणि भलेखoकोoपेशoकरनेoकीoउसकीoअसफलताoपरoवि नयम प्र ाधि धकारि रयों o द्व ाराoऔरoकु छoभीoजि सद्ध o वि कयाoजानाoअपेधि क्ष तoनहीं o हैoक् यों वि कo इस अणि भलेखoसेoयहoवि नष् कषरo वि नकलेगाoवि कo क् याoकाडरo धारकों o कोoयाचीoनेoआवश् यक ंवस् तुओoकाoवि वतरणoवि कयाoथाoयाoनहीं ।oयहoऐसाoठोसoसाቌ्ष यoथाoजि जससेoकायरवावि हयों के oभाग् यoकाoवि नधार णoहोगाoऔरoअणि भलेखoकोoपेशoकरनेoकीoउसकीoअसफलताoपर रद् ‌दकरणoके oआदेशoकोoमात्र oइसoआधारoपरoचुनौतीoनहीं oदीoजाoसकतीoहैoवि कoकोईoभी जाएचoकीoगयीoथी।oनसै र्गि गकoन् यायoकाoवि नयमoकोईoरस् मoनहीं oहैoजि जसकाoपालनoवि कया जानाoअपेधि क्ष तoह।ै oउसेoके वलoतभीoप्र भावीoबनायाoजायेगाoजबoतथ् यों o सेoवि नष् कषर वि नकालाoजायेoवि कoउक्त oवि नयमoकाoपालनoनoकरनेoसेoअपीलाथरoपरoप्र धि तकू लoप्र भाव पडेगा। उपoजि जलाधि धकारीoनेoवादoके oतथ् यों oएंवoपरि रस्बि स् थधि तयों o तथाoअणि भलेखों oमेंoउपलब् ध सामग्र ीoके oबारेoमेंoवि वस् तृतoवि वचारoकरनेoके oउपरान् तoप्र ्न गतoआदेशoपारि रतoवि कयाoह।ै oअपीलाथरoo/ooउधि चतoदरoवि वቅ्र े ताoअपीलoस् तरoपरoअपनेoकथनoके oसम् बन् धoमoें ऐसाoकोईo oभीoसाቌ्ष यoo/ooसबूतoप्र स् तुतoनहीं oवि कयाoहैoजि जससेoइसoतथ् यoकीoपुवि ष्ट oहोoसके oवि कoप्र ्न गतo

आदेशतथ्योंकेविपरीतपारितकियागयाहै।इसप्रकारउक्ततथ्योंकेआलोकमें

प्रश्नगतआदेशमेंदिनांक

30.09.2014

मेंकिसीहस्तक्षेपकीआवश्यकताप्रतीतनहीं

होतीहै।अपीलार्थीकीअपीलबलहीनहोनेकेकारणनिरस्तहोनेयोग्यहै। आदेश

उपरोक्तविवेचनाकेआलोकमेंअपीलबलहीनहोनेकेकारणनिरस्तकीजातीहै।

आदेशकीप्रमाणितप्रति सहितअवरन्यायालयकीपत्रावलीवापसहोकरबाद

आवश्यककार्यवाहीइसन्यायालयकीपत्रावलीदाखि लदफ्तरहो।"

¶6Sri Anoop Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has filed a detailed reply to the charges levelled against him giving proper explanation, however, they were not considered and only on basis of an inquiry report impugned order was passed. The complaints made by the card holders were false and same were influenced by political rivalry.

¶7The stock and distribution registers were properly maintained and it was signed by concern officials also. No complaints were made against the petitioner despite he was running the fair price shop for the last many years.

¶8Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that inquiry was not conducted in a fair manner. Copy of the inquiry report was not provided to the petitioner thus, principles of natural justice were violated. He has placed reliance on a co ordinate bench judgment of this Court in Smt. Santara Devi Vs. State of U.P. & Ors, 2016 (2) ADJ 70.

¶9Per Contra, Sri Shyam Singh, learned Standing Counsel has supported the impugned order and he referred the written complaints made by card holders that several card holders have made complaints that there were irregularities committed by the petitioner while distributing essential commodities.

¶10Learned Standing Counsel also referred the inquiry conducted at petitioner's fair price shop that number of card holders have given their respective statements that there were irregularities as referred in the impugned order during distribution of essential commodities. The petitioner has failed to provide proper satisfactory explanation and principles of natural justice was followed

¶11Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

¶12Allegations against the petitioner was that he was not providing essential commodities on monthly basis to the card holders and many card holders have given their written statements against him.

¶13In order to prove that complaints made by the card holders were incorrect, petitioner was required to produce distribution register of the relevant period, however it is noted in the impugned order that despite complaint was for the period of April and May, 2014 and instead of providing the distribution register for the said period, petitioner has provided distribution register for the month July and August, 2014 which would not be sufficient to hold that complaints regarding irregularities were false. Even the distribution register for month of July, 2014 was not certified by the Supply Inspector, therefore, in absence of distribution register of relevant period, only on a vague ground that complaints were made due to political and other enmity, a submission that complaints were false cannot be accepted.

¶14Specific allegations of irregularities in distribution of essential commodities of less quantity can be satisfied only on the basis of duly certified distribution register of the relevant period, but the same was not provided.

¶15In the entire writ petition, no averment is made in regard to the distribution register of relevant period, nor a copy of the same is annexed along with this writ petition.

¶16Court also takes note of a judgment passed by co-ordinate bench of this Court in Smt. Santara Devi (Supra), relied upon by the petitioner and finds that there is a reference of a judgment passed by Full Bench of this Court in Puran Singh (supra), however, later on in Mahadev vs. State of U.P. and others, 2023:AHC:70488, above referred 'full fledged inquiry' is explained and relevant part thereof is mentioned hereinafter: "16. A Division Bench of this Court has considered the observations made by Full Bench of this Court in Puran Singh vs. State of U.P. and others, (2010) 2 UPLBED 947 and held in Shankar Prasad vs. State of U.P. and others, Misc. Single No. 32679 of 2019 decided on December 8, 2021 that :-"47. Thus, we answer the reference as under:-

(i) It is held that the parameters for an enquiry to be conducted against the licensee for the irregularities committed by the licensee in terms of the Distribution of Essential Commodities is on broad principles of natural justice where the competent authority shall provide a show cause notice to the licensee indicating the violations and irregularities committed by the licensee with sufficient particularity to enable him to respond to the same and after affording an opportunity of hearing, the decision can be taken by the competent authority by a reasoned and a speaking order. The enquiry envisaged is summary in nature and does not entail a detailed hearing, akin to a departmental enquiry;

(ii) It is held that the words "full fledged enquiry" as used by the Full Bench of this Court in the decision of Puran Singh (supra) has to be read in context with paras 4 and 5 of the Government Order of July 2004 and the scheme therein which merely requires adherence to the principles of natural justice and does not provide for a detailed enquiry involving various stages and steps as are required to be met in disciplinary enquiry against a government servant."

¶17In view of above, no illegality is found in the impugned order either on facts or on law.

¶18Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.) October 1, 2026 SB High Court of Judicature at Allahabad