Sheshnarayan Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9043 of 2017 =========================================================== Sheshnarayan Sharma, son of Sri Ganga Mishtri, resident of VillageNarayanpur, P.O.- Jaipur, P.S.- Katoria, District- Banka. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

2. The District Magistrate, Banka, District- Banka.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Advocate. For the Respondents : None =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 14-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

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, Banka vide Memo No. 412 dated 05.05.2016 whereby and whereunder licence of the petitioner's Fair Price Shop bearing no. 58/12 has been cancelled contained in Annexure-1.

(B) A mandamus commanding the Respondents to restore the petitioner's licence as before and to make allotment for the petitioner's shop..

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

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a short submission to assail the impugned order on the ground that a copy of

Patna High Court CWJC No.9043 of 2017 dt.14-12-2017 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 15 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. None appears on behalf of the respondents. 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 dated 05.05.2016 (Annexure-1) is hereby quashed and the matter remanded to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Banka, 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.9043 of 2017 dt.14-12-2017

7. The writ petition stands allowed as above. Md. Ibrarul/BT (Vikash Jain, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 20.12.2017 Transmission Date N.A.