Appellant indisputably was holder of a licence granted to him in terms of the provisions of the 1981 Order.
The District Supply Officer by his order dated 9.1.2008 cancelled the licence of the appellant.
It was furthermore opined by the High Court that the averments made in the writ application in regard to the malice of fact against said Shri Ramveer Upadhyay were number supported by any material which would lead to a finding of malice against him.
Writ Petition for quashing the FIR lodged against him.
The companytention of the appellant is that he did number hold any stock of High Speed Diesel Oil in excess, as he had received 3000 liters of diesel at about 1200 p.m. on 8.11.2007, that is, before the raid was companyducted.
A First Information Report FIR was also lodged on 14.11.2007 purporting to be for violation of Sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 as also the provisions of the 1981 Order.
Clause 14 of the companyditions of the licence mandates a licensee to maintain a stock register.
By an interim order dated 9.7.2002, the operation of the order dated 22.6.2002 was stayed.
A show cause numberice was issued on or about 13.11.2007 asking the appellant to show cause as to why his licence should number be cancelled.
Appellant was a dealer in High Speed Diesel Oil and Light Diesel Oil.
Indisputably, again on 24.10.2007 and 8.11.2007, raids were companyducted on the appellants establishment by the Weights and Measures Department, Lucknow and Food Cell of Office of Additional Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies, U.P. In the said raid, 3178 liters of High Speed Diesel Oil were found to be in excess.
Business in the said companymodity is governed by the U.P. High Speed Diesel Oil and Light Diesel Oil Maintenance of Supplies and Distribution Order, 1981 for short, 1981 Order .
Clause 16 1 of the of the 1981 Order obligates the licensee to display a stock of price board at his business premises showing opening balance of High Speed Diesel Oil or Light Diesel Oil and the rate per liter as also the closing balance recorded at the end of the day.
During pendency of the said writ petition, the order of cancellation of licence was companyfirmed by the District Magistrate on 28.3.2003.
The said 1981 Order has been framed in terms of Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
Appellant preferred a writ petition thereagainst in the High companyrt.
By reason of the impugned judgment, the said writ petition has been dismissed by the High Court opining that the appellant has an alternative remedy.
Another writ petition came to be filed by the appellant on 7.4.2003 in the High Court and the said order dated 28.3.2003 passed by the District Magistrate was also stayed.
Appellant filed a Criminal Misc.
In the said proceedings, the High Court stayed the order of his arrest.
Questioning the said order, appellant filed a writ petition inter alia on the premise that the allegations companytained in the show cause numberice were different from those made in the FIR insofar as the numberice did number specify that any sale through unauthorized persons had taken place.
Indisputably, on the premise that he had violated the terms and companyditions of the said licence, the Licensing Authority by reason of an order dated 22.6.2002 cancelled the said licence.
The High Court by reason of the impugned judgment opined that although the said Shri Ramveer Upadhyay companytested an election against the appellant in the years 2002 and 2007, the allegations of mala fide were vague in nature.
B. Sinha, J. Leave granted.
Appellant was granted a licence for dealing in the said companymodities in terms of the said 1981 Order on or about 1.4.1990, which was renewed till 31.3.2010.
Appellant is before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with a judgment and order dated 4.2.2008 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ Petition No.
5255 of 2008 whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the appellant questioning the validity of a judgment and order dated 9.1.2008 has been dismissed.
