HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1460 of 2009 (M/S) Hari Singh and another. … Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand and three others. … Respondents Mr. B.B. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K.P. Uppadhyay, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State/respondent nos. 1 to 3. Dated: September 2,2009: Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 03.08.2008 passed by respondent no.3/ Sub Divisional Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar whereby suspension of the agreement of fair price shop was revoked. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that only the higher and superior authority than the S.D.M., Roorkee can restore the licence of fair price shop, hence the order passed by the S.D.M., Roorkee is without jurisdiction and is not tenable in the eyes of law. This argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is apparently misconceived, as the authority who has passed order suspending the licence of fair price shop is fully competent to revoke the same. Learned counsel for the petitioners then contended that the order impugned has been passed without assigning any reason and deserves to be set-aside. A bare perusal of the order impugned illustrates that before passing the order impugned the 2 S.D.M. has discussed the matter and imposed fine of Rs. 1,000/- on the respondent no.4. This Court does not see any illegality in the order dated 03.08.2008. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed in limine. No order as to costs. (V.K. Bist, J.) 02.09.2009 NCM: