HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 18001 of 2018 Court No. - 36 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J. Substitution Application No. 21/2024 1. Heard. 2. Allowed. 3. Necessary substitution be carried out during course of day. Order on Writ 1. Heard Sri S.N. Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri S.B. Singh, learned Standing Counsel for State. 2. There are two fair price shop licensees before this Court and are a common order whereby respective licenses were put under suspension and subsequently, they were cancelled by a common order dated 22.09.2014 passed by District Supply Officer, Mau. According to said order, there were allegations against both licensees that they have not pasted additional list of BPL on their respective shops and they have not procured distribution certificate from Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat. 3. An explanation that by an order dated 01.07.2011, SDM, Sadar, Mau has directed both petitioners to get distribution certificate from Gram Panchayat Adhikari and not necessarily from Gram Pradhan, rejected on a ground that vide a letter dated 13.06.2011, the concerned Officer has Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shivendra Nath Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Harindra Prasad, Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay, Saurabh Raj Srivastava Ram Bachan And Another .....Petitioner(s) Commissioner,Azamgargh And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) stated that in case there were some disputes between the licensees and Gram Pradhan refused to give distribution certificate, then it can be signed by half of Member of Administrative Committee and then under signature of Supply Officer, distribution can be made, however, same was not undertaken by petitioners. 4. Further allegation was that one of licensee has sold wheat at Rs. 6.65 per kg despite fixed price was only Rs. 6.60 per kg. 5. Both petitioners have filed their respective appeal, however, same was dismissed by other common impugned order dated 27.03.2025 on same grounds. An additional ground was also taken that petitioners have filed a common statement of number of cardholders but it was not supported by any affidavit. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that once there was a specific direction issued by S.D.M. that distribution certificate can be issued by Gram Panchayat Adhikari, then, it was not warranted for petitioners to get distribution certificate from half of Members of Administrative Committee and no condition was put in this regard. No other allegation was put at that time when order of suspension was passed. 7. Learned Standing Counsel has supported impugned orders that impugned orders have assigned reasons, therefore, may not be interfered in writ jurisdiction. 8. I have considered submissions of rival parties and perused the records. 9. Main argument of learned counsel for petitioners is that once there was a direction of SDM concerned dated 01.07.2011 that was complied with that distribution certificate was issued by Gram Panchayat Adhikari and it does not take note of the earlier order dated 13.06.2011, therefore, there was no requirement for petitioners to get distribution certificate from half of Members of Administrative Committee. 10. Aforesaid ground was specifically taken in memo of appeal, however, it was not dealt with by Appellate Authority. 11. So far as other allegation is concerned, Court finds that only on a WRIC No. 18001 of 2018 2 ground that list of BPL was not pasted shall not be sufficient to cancel the license. No other irregularity was shown either in the order of suspension or thereafter. 12. Court further takes note that purpose of certificate was that there must be verification that all commodities was distributed amongst cardholders and in case there was any doubt on certificate, inquiry may be conducted on basis of distribution and stock register, which does not appear to be conducted in present case. 13. In aforesaid circumstances, order passed by the Appellate Authority is liable to set aside, hence, set aside and matter is remitted back to Appellate Authority to pass a fresh order taking note of memo of appeal and in case verification is required, it can be verified from respective stock and distribution register. 14. Writ petition stands disposed of with above observations and directions. September 15, 2026 N. Sinha WRIC No. 18001 of 2018 3 (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.) Digitally signed by :- NIRMAL SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad