JUDGMENT The petitioner was a fair price shop dealer in essential commodities. Consequent upon an inspection/raid it was alleged that the petitioner had violated Essential Commodities Act. The allegations are that the petitioner had subject the license to one Ramesh Yadav who was running the shop illegally, and there were lot of complaints. On inspection, the display board was not found affixed, cash memo and registers were not found, physical verification of the articles of essential commodities also showed shortcomings, weights of different dimensions and other articles were also found. An F.I.R. was lodged. The petitioner's goods were confiscated under the Essential Commodities Act by the order of Deputy Commissioner. Apart from confiscation, the Deputy Commissioner also cancelled the license of the petitioner. An appeal was preferred by the petitioner in which the order of confiscation was maintained by the District Judge but the cancellation was set aside on the ground of lack of independent cancellation proceedings under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984. Subsequently, a mere show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner and after considering the reply the fair price shop license was cancelled. The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground that a mere show-cause notice is not sufficient in compliance of the cancellation procedure. The jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is discretionary and equitable. In substance, the petitioner is saying before this Court that the petitioner has flagrantly violated the Essential Commodities Act i.e. the terms of his license which has been recorded as a finding in the confiscation proceeding which have attained finality in appeal before the District Judge, and yet despite such violation, on the technical ground of complete procedure not having been followed, the petitioner's license of dealing with essential commodities should be restored. In my opinion, the basic requirement of natural justice and fair play having been met by the show-cause notice, this is not a fit case for exercise of discretionary jurisdiction of this Court. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed.