IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 14673 of 2010 Date of Decision: 1.9.2010. Suraj Bhan --Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. S.R. Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) The petitioner was a depot holder at village Hulla Heri, District Sonepat. On the basis of some complaint the Deputy Commissioner, Sonepat asked the District Food Supplies Officer, Sonepat to examine the same. The D.F.S.O, Sonepat vide his letter dated 8.1.2009 informed the Deputy Commissioner about various irregularities detailed in the impugned order. Based upon the aforesaid information a show cause notice dated 13.2.2009 was issued to the petitioner. After considering his reply and affording him an opportunity of personal hearing the District Food & Supplies Controller passed the impugned order dated 4.3.2009 (Annexure P- 1) canceling the license of the petitioner with immediate effect and forfeiting security of Rs. 10,000/-. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the aforesaid order before the District Magistrate, Sonepat. The appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed. The only contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the complaint is false and it is due to some enemity that such a complaint has been filed. It is further stated that the quantity of the alleged misappropriation is too small warranting such a harsh action. CWP. No. 14673 of 2010 -2- From the impugned order it appears that 70 K.G of wheat and 10 K.G of sugar was misappropriated in the month of September, 2008, 70 K.G of what, 16-500 K.G of sugar and 3 liter of kerosine oil was found misappropriated in the month of October, 2008 and another misappropriation of 9.5 liter of kerosine oil was found in the month of November, 2008. This is a serious matter. The Court can take judicial notice that the Public Distribution System is not working well and the deserving people do not get the ration and other articles which are being distributed through the Public Distribution System. It is primarily because of the persons like the petitioner that the poor men do not get such facilities. This Court while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot sit as a Court of Appeal over the decisions taken by the competent authority in such matters. I find no reasons to interfere in the order. Petition dismissed. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 1.9.2010. lucky