Ramchandra Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10338 of 2015 ====================================================== Ramchandra Chaudhary S/o Late Biranchi Chaudhary Resident of Village Mujauna Tola Budhi Ghat, Post Haripur, P.S. Alauli, District Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

2. The District Magistrate, Khagaria, District Khagaria.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raju Giri- G.P.-30 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 05-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 01.07.2015 as contained in Annexure-1 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officercum-Licensing Authority Khagaria by which his License no. 21A/2007 granted for fair price shop has been cancelled.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that though a show cause notice was served upon him and he had submitted a reply to the same, a copy of which has been appended as Annexure-3, however, consideration of the reply to the show cause notice, licence of the petitioner has been cancelled simply on the ground that on that particular date his shop was closed.

Patna High Court CWJC No.10338 of 2015 (2) dt.05-01-2016 notice has not been found to be satisfactory. In my opinion, that would not be sufficient. It is well-settled that if the action or order of the authority concerned is going to visit civil consequence upon a person or party, then consideration of the grounds raised by him answering the charges should be made and the reasons should be recorded as why such ground could not find favour with the authority concerned.

That apart, in my view, the closure of a shop on a particular day may be breach of terms and conditions of the licence and cannot be proper or justified but that was not such a grave violation which would entail cancellation of licence. As a result, this writ petition succeeds and the impugned order, contained in Annexure-1 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the licensing authority for taking a fresh decision after proper consideration of the reply to the show cause notice filed by the petitioner and decision of the Division Bench of this Court (Annexure-4).

It is expected that entire exercise would be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) siddharth/Lata/- U T