[2026:RJ-JP:16737] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17708/2025 Hukum Singh S/o Shri Richhpal Singh, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Village Rajpur Chhota, Ration Shopkeeper Of 1/2 Part Of Gram Panchayat Rajpur Chhota, Tehsil Raini, District Alwar (Posh Machine Code No. 17328) ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Commissioner, Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Additional Commissioner, Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. District Collector (Supply), Alwar. 4. District Supply Officer, Alwar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohar Pal Meena For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 21/04/2026 1. The present petition has been filed assailing the impugned order dated 23.04.2025 passed by the Additional Food Commissioner in Revision Petition No. 35/2024 whereby the said petition was dismissed and the order dated 29.07.2024 passed by District Collector in Appeal No. 12/50/2024, and order dated 03.01.2024 by which the authorization letter of the Fair Price Shop of the petition was canceled and the security amount of the petitioner was directed to be forfeited was allowed. 2. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. Upon [2026:RJ-JP:16737] (2 of 2) [CW-17708/2025] doing the needful, it is opined that concurrent findings have been jot down in the impugned order, and the same have been opined after considering the material facts and prevailing circumstances, inter alia, fiscal variations, material irregularities on the part of the petitioner. The relevant extract from the impugned order dated 23.04.2025 is reproduced herienbelow: "geus mHk; i{k dh cgl dks /;kuiwoZd lquk i=koyh ij miyC/k nLrkostksa ,oa iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk esa mBk;s x;s rF;ksa ij euu fd;k x;kA izkFkhZ ij eq[; vkjksi ;g gS fd izkFkhZ dh mfpr ewY; nqdku ,oa vVSp nqdku dk HkkSfrd lR;kiu fd;s tkus ij 34580-16 fdyksxzke xsgwW de ik;k x;k tks fd fuf'pr :Ik ls mDr vfu;ferrk gekjs erkuqlkj lkoZtfud forj.k iz.kkyh ds rgr xaHkhj vfu;ferrk dh Js.kh esa vkrh gSA izkFkhZ }kjk mDr vkjksiksa ds laca/k esa nkSjkus lquokbZ ,slk dksbZ lk{;@Bksl lcwr is'k ugha fd;k x;k ftlls dh vfu;ferrk dks udkjk tk ldsA blds vfrfjDr LOkhd`r uD'kk vuqlkj nqdku lapkfyr ugha djuk] LVkWd jftLVj la/kkfjr ugha ik;k tkuk] uksfVl cksMZ ij vko';d lwpukvksa dk vadu ugha djuk Hkh xaHkhj izd`fr dh vfu;ferrkvksa dh Js.kh esa vkrh gSA blds vfrfjDRk izkFkhZ }kjk v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa ds fu.kZ;ksa esa ,slk dksbZ lk{; dFku ;k vk/kkj Hkh izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k ftlls fd fjfotu ds [k.M 22 , jktLFkku [kk|kUu ,oa vU; vko';d inkFkZ ¼forj.k dk fofu;eu½ vkns'k] 1976 dh ifjf/k esa v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa esa =qfV;ksa dks ekuk tk ldsA v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk xq.k&voxq.k ds vk/kkj ij fu.kZ; ikfjr fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa ds fu.kZ; esa gLr{ksi fd;s tkus dks dksbZ ;qfDr&;qDr dkj.k izrhr ugha gksrk gSA ge v/khuLFk fu.kZ;ksa esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dk gLr{ksi fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha le>rs gSaA vr% izkFkhZ iqujh{k.kdrkZ dh iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk vLohdkj dh tkrh gSA" 3. In view of the aforementioned, this Court finds no apparent error, perversity or arbitrariness in the order impugned, as the same is passed after due consideration of material facts and circumstances. 4. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/1