1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT DB Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 213/2010 in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 2070/2009 Mangilal Vs Additional Food Commissioner & ors 21.4.2010 Hon'ble Mr Justice Dalip Singh Hon'ble Mr Justice MN Bhandari Mr SS Hora – for appellant BY THE COURT: Aggrieved by the order dated 13.4.2009 this appeal has been preferred. It is a case where appellant's licence for fair price shop was cancelled after proper inquiry. Learned counsel for appellant submits that order for cancellation and subsequent order are based on suspicion, otherwise nothing was proved to show that 1640 litres of kerosene was not distributed to the consumers, thus impugned orders passed by the authorities concerned as also the 2 learned Single Judge may be set aside. We have considered submissions of learned counsel for appellant and also perused record of the case. Perusal of the order passed by the District Collector dated 28.4.2007 shows that distribution register maintained by the appellant was not containing details of distribution of kerosene. In absence of required details which include names of consumers with ration card numbers etc a further verification regarding distribution of kerosene cannot be made merely on the basis of signatures or thumb impressions. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that the register was containing signatures and thumb impressions thus based on that consumers should have been asked about distribution of kerosene. We are unable to accept aforesaid submission. The register has to be maintained properly by the dealer. If kerosene was distributed to the consumers then their names, ration card numbers and signatures/ thumb impressions etc should have been there in the register, in absence of which consumers cannot be identified for verification based on signatures and thumb 3 impressions only. In view of aforesaid and the fact that there exist finding of fact based on material, thus the orders cannot be interfered with unless there is gross perversity. Learned Single Judge has considered aforesaid aspects while passing detailed judgment. It is not a case where order has been passed based on suspicion. We find no error or illegality in the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the special appeal is dismissed. Stay application also stands dismissed. (MN Bhandari), J. (Dalip Singh) J bnsharma