Patna High CourtCWJC/2989/2017disposed

Jagdish Rajak v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-12-14Mr. Justice Vikash Jain3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2989 of 2017 =========================================================== Jagdish Rajak, Son of Late Raghuvir Rajak, Resident of Village-Bakhara Bujurg, P.O.-Jarang Rampur, P.S.-Bhawanpur, District-Vaishali at Hajipur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Vaishali, District-Vaishali.

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Hajipur, District-Vaishali. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Alok Ranjan, AC to GA6 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 14-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

"(A) A certiorari for quashing and setting aside the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Hajipur vide Memo No. 1034 dated 17.11.2016 whereby and whereunder licence of the petitioner's Fair Price Shop bearing no. 82/07 has been cancelled contained in Annexure-1. (ii) A mandamus commanding the Respondents to restore the petitioner's licence as before and to make allotment for the petitioner's shop.

(iii) Any other relief or reliefs for which petitioner may be found entitled in the fact and circumstances of the present case may be granted".

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a short

Patna High Court CWJC No.2989 of 2017 dt.14-12-2017 2/3 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 adducing evidence in that regard. A specific stand has been taken in paragraph 12 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 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 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Hajipur vide Memo No. 1034 dated 17.11.2016 (Annexure-1) is hereby quashed and the matter remanded to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Hajipur 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.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2989 of 2017 dt.14-12-2017 3/3

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.

7. The writ petition stands allowed as above. B.T/Chandran (Vikash Jain, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 19.12.2017 Transmission Date N.A.