1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.2070/2009. : : Mangi Lal Vs. Additional Food Commissioner, Jaipur & Ors. : : Date of Order 13.4.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. S. S.Hora for the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This writ petition seeks to challenge the order passed by District Supply Officer, Chittorgarh dated 30.1.2006 whereby license of the petitioner of fair price shop was cancelled, against the order dated 28.4.2007 by which his appeal was dismissed by District Collector, Chittorgarh and also order dated 1.10.2008 passed by Additional Food Commissioner, Jaipur by which his revision petition was dismissed. 3. Shri S. S. Hora, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that there was no proper enquiry conducted by the District Supply Officer and that show cause notice was an 2 empty formality. It was contended that even the District Supply Officer himself was not satisfied about allegation against the petitioner, which is evident even from the conclusion recorded in the impugned order. It was contended that petitioner had satisfactorily explained the charges and that the allegation that on physical verification 1640 liters of kerosene was found short in the store was fully explained that although the quantity of distributed kerosene was entered in the relevant ration cards, but corresponding entries in the distribution register could not be made. The findings were recorded in a hurried way without proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and entries from ration cards were also not checked. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned orders, I find that there is indeed a serious charge of committing irregularities against the petitioner on which he was duly served with a show cause notice. Major charge against the petitioner was that on physical verification of the store, 1640 liters of kerosene was found short and that it was found that distribution register relating to month of November, 2005 had forged signatures in the column of receipt at various places on pages No.1 to 4 3 in the said register, 450 liters of the kerosene was shown as short and 1085 liters of kerosene was shown as balance, whereas names of ration card holders were not entered in the unit register, which indicated that petitioner was attempting to make fabrication of records to justify his misdeeds. The contention of the petitioner that in the impugned order it has simply been observed that non- maintenance of proper record brings the matter within the purview of doubt and on the basis of mere doubt the license of the petitioner could not be cancelled because the District Supply Officer himself was not satisfied about allegation against the petitioner cannot be accepted. The DSO was connived convinced that the petitioner while distributing the permitted items under the license was not making proper entry of the names of customers in the distribution register, not indicating the amount received not displaying the price list etc. There are serious irregularities, therefore, he observed that all this makes the matter doubtful. But then it does not mean that petitioner was able to explain all these irregularities. Submissions that it was for the respondents to also check the ration card of the customers to find out whether actually the kerosene for which shortage of 1640 4 liters of kerosene was alleged was not distributed, cannot be accepted because such verification could be made from the consumers by respondents only when the particulars of the ration card holders were actually found entered in the distribution register. The Appellate Authority and the Revisional Authority were fully justified in concurring with the view taken by DSO. I, therefore, do not find any merit which is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.43.