Patna High CourtCWJC/8251/2018allowed

Shivbarat Paswan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-05-14Mr. Justice Vikash Jain3 pages

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 Date 21.05.2018 Transmission Date N.A.