Reserved on 18.09.2026 Delivered on 23.09.2026 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 37546 of 2026 …..Petitioner(s) Versus State of U.P. and 2 others …..Respondent(s) Court No. - 36 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J. 1. This is a case arising out of cancellation of fair price shop licence of petitioner vide an order dated 22.02.2025 passed by District Supply Officer and rejection of appeal thereof vide an order dated 15.05.2026 passed by Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad. 2. According to record, on basis of certain complaints a surprise inspection of petitioner’s fair price shop was conducted on 11.09.2024 when shop was found closed and petitioner refused to come despite an information was forwarded and, therefore, shop was sealed. Smt. Madhubala Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Syed Mohd. Iqbal Hasan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. 2 Writ C No. 37546 of 2026 3. During inspection statements of 20 card holders were recorded that petitioner’s behaviour towards card holders was bad and there was irregularities in distribution of foodgrains. The essential commodities were not completely provided as per the respective quota of card holders and such irregularities were repeated in every month. 4. Petitioner thereafter requested concerned respondent to make a fresh inspection and accordingly on 12.09.2024 again an inspection was conducted. Seal was opened and stocks available was weighed and after comparing with stock record available on website of Department, 60 kg wheat was found less and 47 kg. rise was found excess. It was also found that necessary display of informations was not available on shop. 5. Accordingly vide an order dated 25.09.2024, a charge sheet was submitted on above referred irregularities and mismatch of stock and petitioner was asked to submit explanation. 6. Petitioner submitted an explanation dated 18.10.2024 that statements made by 20 card holders during inspection were false and were made under compulsion. Stock verification may be conducted again and complaint on basis of which inspection was conducted was not accompanied by an affidavit. Some of the card holders who were earlier made complaints against petitioner have filed affidavits in favour of petitioner. About more than 55 affidavits of card holders were submitted that there was no complaint against petitioner. 7. In pursuance of above reply on 09.11.2024 a further inspection was conducted wherein statements of 40 more card holders were recorded and they have also submitted that there were various 3 Writ C No. 37546 of 2026 irregularities in distribution of foodgrains and on said date also physical verification of stock was not found matched with the record available with Department. Accordingly, District Supply Officer vide order dated 25.11.2024 attached fair price shop of petitioner. 8. Subsequently, matter was heard by District Supply Officer and he has considered material on record, complaints, affidavits and also taken note that during pendency on 03.02.2025 and 04.02.2025 the deponents of affidavits sworn in favour of petitioner were verified, however, about 40 such card holders have denied contents of their respective affidavits with specific assertion that their signatures and thump impressions were taken without disclosing contents of affidavits and their photographs and documents were misused. Said authority has also found that complaints were genuine, stock remained mismatched on two inspections, therefore, vide an order dated 22.02.2025, licence of petitioner was cancelled. Relevant part of order is mentioned hereinafter: " उपरोक्त शपथ - पत्र कतओं द्वारो शपथपत्र क परोक्षण क समय स्वेच्छा स अंकिकत करोय गय बयनों म शपथथ गण द्वारो स्पष्ट रूप स स्वे करो किकय गय है$ किक ओंलोच्य उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त द्वारो प्रश्नोंगत शपथपत्र शपथथ गण क धोखे म रोखेकरो , कपटप0ण ढंग स , शपथपत्र क अंभि3कथनों क चि4पकरो , शपथपत्र क उद्देश्य क भ्रचिमत करोक एवे फर्जी: तरोक स अंपनों पक्ष म प्रस्त;त किकय गय है$। इसक अंचितरिरोक्त शपथथ गण / रोशनों कर्डधोरोक द्वारो यहै 3 स्वे करो किकय गय है$ किक ओंलोच्य उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त द्वारो किनोंधोरिरोत प्रचित य0किनोंट 05 किक०ग्रा० मत्र स कम मत्र म खेद्यान्नों दिदय गय है$ , अंथत उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त द्वारो सवेर्जीकिनोंक किवेतरोण प्रणलो क अंन्तगत रोशनों कर्डधोरोक म ओंवेश्यक वेस्त;ओं क किवेतरोण क सद3 म घटतFलो कG गय है$। इस प्रकरो स्वेय शपथथ गण कG उपरोक्तनों;सरो स्वे करोक्तिक्त क ओंधोरो परो प्रश्नोंगत शपथपत्र क0 टरोचि(त एवे फर्जी: पय गय एवे खेद्यान्नों किवेतरोण म घटतFलो किकय र्जीनों कG प;नोंप;चिष्ट हुई है$। इसक अंचितरिरोक्त किवेक्रे त द्वारो रोशनोंकर्डK / पत्रत पर्चि(Mय परो किनोंगत खेद्यान्नों कG मत्र क अंकनों नों करो मत्र चितचिथय क अंकनों करोनों एवे उचि(त दरो दुकनों म गहूँP क स्टQक 0.60 क; न्तलो कम तथ (वेलो क स्टQक 0.47 क; न्तलो अंचिधोक पय र्जीनों क सम्बन्धो म अंपनों कई स्पष्ट करोण 4 Writ C No. 37546 of 2026 प्रस्त;त नोंहै किकय है$ औरो नों है र्जीनोंब0झकरो किवेतरोण रोजिर्जीस्टरो अंपनों स्पष्ट करोण क सथ प्रस्त;त किकय गय है$। किवेक्रे त क उक्त कV त्य स किवेक्रे त द्वारो ओंवेश्यक वेस्त;ओं क किवेतरोण म मनोंमनों करोत हुए घटतFलो किकय र्जीनों कG प्रबलो प;चिष्ट हैत है$। उक्त क अंचितरिरोक्त दुकनों परो ओंवेश्यक स0(नोंए यथ रोट बर्ड , स्टQक बर्ड ( अंप० ) पट सब्सिYसर्ड कG स0(नों , किवे3ग य टलो फ्रीG नोंम्बरो , जिर्जीलो भिशकयत किनोंवेरोण अंचिधोकरो क नोंम वे मबइलो नोंम्बरो ओंदिद प्रदर्शिशMत नोंहै\ करोनों क सम्बन्धो म प्रश्नोंगत उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त द्वारो अंपनों स्पष्ट करोण म कई 3 कथनों / सक्ष्य प्रस्त;त नोंहै\ किकय गय है$ , जिर्जीसस स्पष्ट हैत है$ किक उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त द्वारो ओंवेश्यक वेस्त;ओं क किवेतरोण म परोदर्शिशMत क चि4पकरो मनोंमनों ढंग स किवेतरोण करोत हुए घटतFलो क प्रश्रय दिदय गय है$। इस प्रकरो उपरोक्त किवेवेरोण क ओंधोरो परो शपथ गण/ रोशनोंकर्डधोरोक क द्वारो उपरोक्तनों;सरो र्जी( म प्रप्त स्वे करोक्तिक्त क ओंधोरो परो शपथपत्र क0 टरोचि(त एवे फर्जी: पय र्जीनों, य0किनोंट क अंनों;सरो रोशनों नों दकरो घटतFलो किकय र्जीनों, रोशनोंकर्डK/ पत्रत पर्चि(Mय परो किनोंगत खेद्यान्नों कG मत्र क अंकनों नों करो मत्र चितचिथय क अंकनों किकय र्जीनों वे खेद्यान्नों क स्टQक म उपरोक्तनों;सरो अंकिनोंयचिमतत पय र्जीनों वे उचि(त दरो दुकनों परो ओंवेश्यक स0(नोंओं क प्रदर्शिशMत नों करो घटतFलो कG प;चिष्ट क ओंधोरो परो प्रश्नोंगत श्र मत मधो;बलो, उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त (किनोंलोम्बिम्बत) द्वारो प्रस्त;त स्पष्ट करोण पषण य नोंहै\ पय गय है$। तत्क्रेम म उपरोक्त अंकिनोंयचिमततओं क दृचिष्टगत उत्तरो प्रदश ओंवेश्यक वेस्त; ( किवेक्रेय एवे किवेतरोण किनोंयन्त्रण क किवेकिनोंयमनों) ओंदश-2016 (यथसशचिधोत) तथ अंनों;बन्धो- पत्र कG किवेभि3न्नों शतK क उल्लोघनों करोनों क्रेम म श्र मत मधो;बलो, उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त (किनोंलोम्बिम्बत), महैल्लो (क्करो कG चिमलोक पश्चिfम क्षत्र, मण्र्डलो म;रोदबद क अंनों;बन्धो पत्र उनोंक द्वारो र्जीम समस्त प्रचित30चित शसनों क पक्ष म रोर्जीसत करोत हुए र्जीनोंकिहैत क दृचिष्टगत किनोंरोस्त किकय र्जीनों सम्बम्बिन्धोत ओंख्य जिर्जीलोचिधोकरो महैदय कG अंनों;मचित/ अंनों;मदनों हैत; दिदनोंक 17.02.2025 क पत्रवेलो प्रकिषत कG गय , प्रकिषत पत्रवेलो परो जिर्जीलोचिधोकरो महैदय स प्रप्त अंनों;मचित/ अंनों;मदनों दिदनोंक 19.02.2025 क अंनों;पलोनों म श्र मत मधो;बलो, उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त (किनोंलोम्बिम्बत), (क्करो कG चिमलोक, म;रोदबद कG उचि(त दरो दुकनों कG र्जीम समस्त प्रचित30चित शसनों क पक्ष म रोर्जीसत करोत हुए उसक किनोंलोम्बिम्बत अंनों;बन्धो पत्र एतद्देiवेरो किनोंरोस्त किकय र्जीत है$।" 9. Petitioner thereafter filed an appeal, however, it was dismissed vide an order dated 15.05.2026 and relevant part thereof is also mentioned hereinafter: " र्जीP( क दFरोनों 40 कर्ड धोरोक द्वारो अंपनों बयनों दर्जी करोय गय, जिर्जीनोंम अंचिधोकश कर्ड धोरोक द्वारो किनोंधोरिरोत मत्र स कम मत्र म खेद्यान्नों प्रप्त हैनों क बयनों दर्जी करोय गय। तत्पfत पयवेक्षक अंचिधोकरो क बयनों 5 Writ C No. 37546 of 2026 दर्जी किकय गय, जिर्जीसम उनोंक द्वारो कहै गय किक मj स म ग;प्त, ऑगनोंबड़ी कयकत्र ओंर्जी दिदनोंPक 09.11.2024 क र्जीP( अंचिधोकरो क समक्ष बयनों करोत हूँP किक मj मधो;बलो उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त, (क्करो कG चिमलोक कG दुकनों परो पयवेक्षक अंचिधोकरो नोंचिमत हूँP। मरो द्वारो गत महै म अंपनों उपब्सिस्थचित म मधो;बलो क द्वारो रोशनों कर्ड धोरोक क किनोंयमनों;सरो खेद्यान्नों किनोंmश;ल्क बPटवेय र्जी रोहै है$ तथ म किवेतरोण प्ररोम्3 हैनों क 2-3 दिदनों म अंवेश्य है उपब्सिस्थत रोहैत हूँP। मरो अंनों;पब्सिस्थचित म मधो;बलो क द्वारो यदिद किवेतरोण किकय गय है$, त मj उसक भिलोय उत्तरोदय नोंहै\ हूँP, बयनों पढ़करो तस्द क किकय गय। इसक अंचितरिरोक्त, श्र मत मधो;बलो क बयनों दर्जी किकय गय, जिर्जीसम अंन्य तथ्य क उल्लोखे करोत हुए श्र मत मधो;बलो द्वारो कहै गय किक हैरो महै पयवेक्षक अंचिधोकरो कG उपब्सिस्थचित म रोशनों कर्ड धोरोक क किनोंयमनों;सरो किनोंmश;ल्क गहूँP वे (वेलो क किवेतरोण करोत हूँP तथ मरो दुकनों क खेद्यान्नों मरो दुकनों कG (हैद्दे म रोखे है$ औरो अंन्य किकस र्जीगहै म मरो दुकनों क स्टQक नोंहै\ रोखे है$ तथ मरो द्वारो ई- पQश मश नों स किवेतरोण किकय र्जीनों क करोण किबक्रेG रोजिर्जीस्टरो नोंहै\ बनोंय र्जीत है$। बयनों पढ़करो तस्द क किकय गय। कयलोय जिर्जीलो प0र्चितM अंचिधोकरो - म;रोदबद क पत्रक 2344 दिदनोंPक 25.11.2024 क द्वारो किनोंगत ओंरोप पत्र क सम्बन्धो म किनोंलोम्बिम्बत उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त द्वारो स्पष्ट करोण दिदनोंPक 23.12.2024 प्रस्त;त किकय गय। तत्पfत सय;क्त ट म द्वारो मFक परो मFर्जी0द रोशनों कर्ड धोरोक क बयनों भिलोय गय , जिर्जीनोंम 40 रोशनों कर्ड धोरोक क बयनों दिदय गय , जिर्जीसम अंचिधोकश कर्ड धोरोक द्वारो किनोंयमनों;सरो किवेतरोण किकय र्जीनों क बयनों दर्जी करोय गय। तत्पfत श्र मत मधो;बलो , उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त द्वारो प्रस्त;त स्पष्ट करोण दिदनोंPक 18.10.2024 एवे दिदनोंPक 23.12.2024 एवे उनोंक सथ सलोग्नों शपथ पत्र क परोक्षण किकय गय। सय;क्त र्जीP( ट म द्वारो दिदनोंPक 03.02.2025 एवे 04.02.2025 क सम्पक करो प04त4 कG गय , जिर्जीसम अंफसरो पत्नों ओंशफ अंलो द्वारो अंपनों बयनों म कहै गय किक शपथ पत्र परो मjनों कई किनोंशनों अंग0Pठा नोंहै\ बनोंय है$ अंथत किवेक्रे त क पक्ष म शपथ पत्र दनों स इन्करो किकय गय। इस प्रकरो श्र मत नोंग नों पत्नों शहैदत वे म;न्नों पत्नों 30रो वे स0रोर्जीवेत पत्नों वे रो सिंसMहै वे प0नोंम पत्नों रोर्जीबहैदुरो वे ककिवेत पत्नों बVर्जीपलो वे स;मनों दवे पत्नों (न्द्रपलो वे मनों ष प;त्र धोमवे रो वे रोर्जीन्द्ररो पत्नों ओंशरोम वे अंमरोवेत पत्नों लोखेनों सिंसMहै वे मय रोनों पत्नों हैरोपलो सिंसMहै वे ककिवेत पत्नों स तरोम वे 30रोर्जीहैP पत्नों र्जीकिहैद हुस$नों वे शबनों पत्नों अंल्लोदिदय वे मत रोम प;त्र हुक; म सिंसMहै वे प0नोंम प;त्र लोट0रो सिंसMहै वे सजिर्जीद पत्नों र्जीम लो वे नों लोम पत्नों ओंश ष वे इकिनोंश प;त्र नोंवे हैसनों वे इममबख्श प;त्र सदलो वे बन्नों पत्नों रोस0लोबख्श वे किनोंयमत पत्नों म;रोद अंलो वे अंनों स पत्नों म;श्तक वे रुखेसनों पत्नों सकिबरो अंलो वे सलोम पत्नों शरोफ वे शब नों पत्नों फरोमनों अंलो वे रोम प;त्र सकिबरो हुस$नों वे ग;किर्डय पत्नों सत श वे अंरूण प;त्र हैरोपलो सिंसMहै वे हैरोवेत पत्नों रोम3रोस वे स म पत्नों मFहैम्मद य;नों;स वे र्जीसवेन्त प;त्र म;खेरोम वे सबरो पत्नों कल्लो0 वे अंरोमनों र्जीहैP पत्नों नोंभिसरो वे 6 Writ C No. 37546 of 2026 नों0रोर्जीहैP पत्नों इल्लो वे स;मनों प;त्र (रू सिंसMहै वे म;र्जी म प;त्र 4ट अंलो वे र्जीफरो पत्नों अंसगरो वे शबनों पत्नों य0स;फ क; लो -40 कर्ड धोरोक द्वारो श्र मत मधो;बलो उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त क पक्ष म कई शपथ पत्र नोंहै\ दिदय र्जीनों क बयनों दर्जी करोय गय हैj । जिर्जीलो प0र्चितM अंचिधोकरो- म;रोदबद द्वारो समस्त तथ्य क ओंधोरो परो यहै उल्लोखे करोत हुए किक रोशनों कर्ड धोरोक क द्वारो र्जीP( म प्रप्त स्वे करोक्तिक्त क ओंधोरो परो शपथ पत्र क0 टरोचि(त एवे फर्जी: पय र्जीनों वे य0किनोंट क अंनों;सरो रोशनों नों दकरो घटतFलो किकय र्जीनों वे रोशनों कर्डu/ पत्रत पर्चि(Mय परो किनोंगत खेद्यान्नों कG मत्र क अंकनों नों करो मत्र चितचिथय क अंकनों किकय र्जीनों वे खेद्यान्नों क स्टQक म उपरोक्तनों;सरो अंकिनोंयचिमतत पय र्जीनों वे उचि(त दरो दुकनों परो ओंवेश्यक वेस्त;ओं क प्रदर्शिशMत नों करो घटतFलो कG प;चिष्ट क ओंधोरो परो श्र मत मधो;बलो उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त द्वारो प्रस्त;त स्पष्ट करोण पषण य नोंहै\ पय गय तथ बरोत गय गम्3 रो अंकिनोंयचिमततओं क दृचिष्टगत जिर्जीलो प0र्चितM अंचिधोकरो- म;रोदबद द्वारो परिरोत ओंदश दिदनोंPक 22.02.2025 क अंन्तगत जिर्जीलोचिधोकरो क अंनों;मदनों दिदनोंPक 19.02.2025 क अंनों;पलोनों म श्र मत मधो;बलो, उचि(त दरो किवेक्रे त किनोंलोम्बिम्बत (क्करो कG चिमलोक- म;रोदबद कG उचि(त दरो दुकनों कG समस्त प्रचित30चित शसनों क पक्ष म रोज्यसत करोत हुए अंनों;बन्धो पत्र किनोंरोस्त किकय र्जीनों क ओंदश परिरोत किकय गय। अंप लोकत द्वारो इस न्ययलोय क समक्ष ऐस कई सक्ष्य प्रस्त;त नोंहै\ किकय गय, जिर्जीसस जिर्जीलो प0र्चितM अंचिधोकरो- म;रोदबद द्वारो परिरोत ओंदश दिदनोंPक 22.02.2025 म किकस हैस्तक्षप क औचि(त्य पय र्जीय। अंतm उक्त किवेवे(नों क ओंधोरो परो अंप लोकत कG अंप लो बलोहै नों हैनों क करोण किनोंरोस्त कG र्जीत है$। इस न्ययलोय क स्थगनों ओंदश यदिद कई है, 3 किनोंरोस्त किकय र्जीत है$। ओंदश कG प्रमजिणत प्रचित सकिहैत कयलोय जिर्जीलो प0र्चितM अंचिधोकरो- म;रोदबद कG पत्रवेलो वेपस प्रकिषत कG र्जीय। बद ओंवेश्यक कयवेहै इस न्ययलोय कG पत्रवेलो सच्यथ अंभि3लोखेगरो परोकिषत कG र्जीय।" 10. Aforesaid orders dated 22.02.2025 and 15.05.2026 are under challenge by way of filing present writ petition. 11. Sri S.M. Iqbal Hasan, learned counsel for petitioner, vehemently argued that petitioner, a Senior Citizen, has never made any irregularities in distribution of foodgrains. Complaints made against her were not genuine rather made under influence of political enemies. Foodgrains were distributed through E-Pos machine, therefore, an allegation of providing less quantity of it was not possible. Petitioner has filed affidavits of more than 50 card holders 7 Writ C No. 37546 of 2026 that there was no irregularities in distribution of essential commodities. Petitioner was not present when subsequently verification was conducted and it appears that said deponents have made a U-turn only under compulsion or pressure. In memo of appeal many grounds were taken, however, they were not considered by Appellate Authority. With regard to mismatch of stock, learned counsel submitted that during distribution some foodgrains fall on floor which were not collected, therefore, there was a mismatch. Though the Court takes more that 60 kg of wheat found less and 47 kg rise was found excess, i.e., a huge quantity. 12. Per contra, Sri Prabhakar Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel, has supported impugned orders that petitioner’s explanation about mismatch of stock was not reasonable. An attempt to file affidavits of card holders remained futile since when it was enquired with said deponents, they have denied about contents of affidavits, rather they alleged that their signatures and thumb impressions were misused. 13. I have considered aforesaid submissions and perused the material available on record. 14. Before considering the matter on merit, the Court takes note of a judgment passed by Supreme Court in Central Council for Research in Ayurvedic Sciences and another vs. Bikartan Das and others, 2023 SCC Online SC 996 wherein scope of writ of certiorari is discussed and relevant part thereof is mentioned hereinafter: “65. Thus, from the various decisions referred to above, we have no hesitation in reaching to the conclusion that a writ of certiorari is a high prerogative writ and should not be issued on mere asking. For the issue of a writ of certiorari, the party concerned has to make out a definite case for the same and is not a matter of course. To put it pithily, certiorari shall issue to correct errors of 8 Writ C No. 37546 of 2026 jurisdiction, that is to say, absence, excess or failure to exercise and also when in the exercise of undoubted jurisdiction, there has been illegality. It shall also issue to correct an error in the decision or determination itself, if it is an error manifest on the face of the proceedings. By its exercise, only a patent error can be corrected but not also a wrong decision. It should be well remembered at the cost of repetition that certiorari is not appellate but only supervisory. 66. A writ of certiorari, being a high prerogative writ, is issued by a superior court in respect of the exercise of judicial or quasi- judicial functions by another authority when the contention is that the exercising authority had no jurisdiction or exceeded the jurisdiction. It cannot be denied that the tribunals or the authorities concerned in this batch of appeals had the jurisdiction to deal with the matter. However, the argument would be that the tribunals had acted arbitrarily and illegally and that they had failed to give proper findings on the facts and circumstances of the case. We may only say that while adjudicating a writ-application for a writ of certiorari, the court is not sitting as a court of appeal against the order of the tribunals to test the legality thereof with a view to reach a different conclusion. If there is any evidence, the court will not examine whether the right conclusion is drawn from it or not. It is a well-established principle of law that a writ of certiorari will not lie where the order or decision of a tribunal or authority is wrong in matter of facts or on merits. (See : King v. Nat Bell Liquors Ltd., [1922] 2 A.C. 128 (PC))” 15. In the present case, inspection of petitioner’s shop was conducted firstly on 11.09.2024 when shop was found closed and statements of 20 card holders were recorded, who made specific allegations of irregularities in distribution of foodgrains and subsequently on 12.09.2024 on request of petitioner inspection of shop was again conducted when 60 kg of wheat was found less and 47 kg of rise was found excess. Petitioner thereafter was provided opportunity to submit explanation. The explanation dated 18.10.2024 does not provide any explanation with regard to mismatch of stock except that a fresh investigation be conducted. Petitioner has annexed 9 Writ C No. 37546 of 2026 affidavits of complainants/ card holders that now they have given statements in favour of petitioner. 16. A subsequent inspection, i.e., third inspection, was also conducted on 09.11.2024 and again there was mismatch of stock. As per record at that time 19 quintal 43 kilogram and 500 gram wheat and 19 quintal 16 kilogram and 500 gram rice was required to be available at the shop, however, still the stock was found less. On that date statements of 40 card holders were recorded and they also made complaints of irregularities of providing less quantity of foodgrains. 17. In above background, the District Supply Officer vide order dated 22.02.2025 cancelled licence of petitioner on ground that she has not provided any substantial explanation of short fall or excess of foodgrains according to record available with Department, not on one time but twice. Number of card holders have filed affidavits in favour of petitioner, however, on verification they have denied contents of affidavits and rather allegation of forgery was made. In memo of appeal, no ground was taken whey such affidavits can still be considered genuine. 18. An argument that statements of deponents of affidavits were reiterated only due to pressure or some other reason, cannot be accepted without any substantial material, rather there are specific finding that it was a case of forgery. 19. An argument that mismatch was found due to fall of foodgrains during distribution also cannot be accepted since as referred above the quantity of mismatch of foodgrains was not a short quantity, rather it was a huge quantity, i.e., 60 kg wheat and 47 kg rice. 10 Writ C No. 37546 of 2026 20. It is also on record that there were other irregularities, such as, required information was not displayed on shop, complaints of providing less quantify of foodgrains remained consistent rather increased in subsequent inspections, no probable explanation was provided, an explanation that weight cannot be short since it was done through E-Pos machine, cannot be accepted as number of card holders have stated that irregularities were committed. 21. In aforesaid circumstances, since licence of petitioner was cancelled on basis of report of three inspections, complaints made by more than 50 card holders about irregularities in distribution, on verification, deponents of affidavits have denied contents of affidavits, rather allegation of forgery was made, petitioner was provided ample opportunity of explanation but failed to provide any reasonable explanation, vague explanation cannot be accepted about mismatch of stock, therefore, in the light of Bikartan Das (supra), no case is made out to issue a writ of certiorari. 22. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.) September 23, 2026 AK Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad