Patna High Court
Shivbarat Paswan vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 14 May, 2018
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 PAT 503
Author: Vikash Jain
Bench: Vikash Jain
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8251 of 2018
===========================================================
Shivbarat Paswan, Son of Raudi Paswan, Resident of Village- Salaia Kala,
Village Panchayat- Salaia Kala, Police Station- Fatehpur, District- Gaya.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and
Consumers Protection, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Gaya.
3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar Gaya.
4. The Block Supply Officer, Fatehpur, District- Gaya.
.... .... Respondents
===========================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Binay Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Upendra Pratap Singh, AC to SC-4
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 14-05-2018
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the
order contained in memo No. 440 dated 11.04.2018 by which the
learned Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar Gaya has cancelled the license No.
42/2016 of the petitioner carrying on business under the Public
Distribution System as a P.D.S. dealer and for direction upon the
respondent No. 3 to continue allocation to PDS shop of the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a short
submission to assail the impugned order on the ground that a copy of
the enquiry report was not made available to the petitioner and he was
never confronted with the same with an opportunity of being heard or
Patna High Court CWJC No.8251 of 2018 dt.14-05-2018
2/3
adducing evidence in that regard. A specific stand has been taken in
paragraph 7 of the writ petition that the impugned order of
cancellation of licence has been passed without providing a copy of the
enquiry report to the petitioner, though the same had been relied upon
in the impugned order.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents appears and has been
heard. The stand of the petitioner with regard to non-supply of the
enquiry report has not been controverted, as no counter affidavit has
been filed till date.
5. In the above view of the matter, this Court is satisfied that
non-supply of the enquiry report to the petitioner has resulted in
violation of natural justice and thus the decision making process stands
vitiated. The impugned order contained in memo No. 440 dated
11.04.2018(Annexure-2) is hereby quashed and the matter remanded to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar Gaya for taking decision afresh in the matter after supplying a copy of the enquiry report to the petitioner and granting an opportunity of hearing in accordance with law. Supplies to the petitioner shall be restored without delay until fresh orders are passed by the respondent no. 3.
6. It is made clear that in case the stand of the petitioner denying receipt of the enquiry report prior to order of cancellation being passed is found to be incorrect, the respondents shall be at liberty to approach this Court for recall of this judgment. Patna High Court CWJC No.8251 of 2018 dt.14-05-2018 3/3
7. The writ petition stands allowed as above.
(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A. Uploading 21.05.2018 Date Transmission N.A. Date