IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Modification Application No. 03 of 2011 IN Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1077 of 2008. Kasturi Lal S/O Shri Lal Chand. … Petitioner. Vs. Commissioner, Garhwal Mandal Garhwal and another …Respondents. Mr. Lok Pal Singh, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. P.C.Bisht, Brief Holder, learned counsel for the respondents. Mr. Niranjan Bhatt, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate learned counsel for the intervener-Tejendra Singh. Date January 6, 2011. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Stay Application No. 11099 of 2010) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this modification application, the applicant- petitioner has prayed that this Court vide order 22-11-2010 has set aside the order dated 21-6-2008 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) passed by the Commissioner, Garhwal Division. According to the applicant, the respondent no.2 did not give any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, while passing the impugned order dated 10-10-2007 passed by respondent no.2. Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner has urged that the order dated 10-10-2007 was also to be set aside, as no opportunity of hearing was given by respondent no. 2 to the petitioner and the matter ought to have been remanded to the respondent no.2-Up Zila Adhikari Haridwar. I have perused the record of the writ petition and the order dated 22-11-2010 passed by this Court as well as the order dated 10- 10-2007 passed by Up Zila Adhikari, Haridwar. It is obvious that the petitioner has also sought quashing of the order dated 10-10-2007 besides assailing the order dated 21-6-2008 passed by the respondent no.1 in the writ petition. 2 From a bare perusal of the order dated 10-10-2007 passed by the respondent no.2 it is crystal clear that no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner while cancelling the fair price shop licence of the petitioner. The order dated 21-6-2008 passed by respondent no. 1 had already been set aside by this Court. In the above facts and circumstances, it would be in the fitness of things to set aside the order passed by Up Zila Adhikari Haridwar dated 10-10-2007 also and to remand the matter to the respondent no.1. Accordingly, the order dated 21-11-2010 passed by this Court deserves to be modified to that extent. The modification application No. 3 of 2011 is allowed. The order dated 10-10-2007 (Annexure-1) is also set aside. The matter is remanded to the respondent no.2-Up Ziladhikari Haridwar for deciding the same afresh in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the parties, expeditiously as far as possible. To that extent, the order dated 22-11-2010 passed by this Court stands modified. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP