Ram Prakash Tanti v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19228 of 2017 =========================================================== Ram Prakash Tanti, Son of Late Saryug Tanti, Resident of Village- Pakthaul, P.O.- Khijirchak, P.S.- Teghra, District- Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

2. The District Magistrate, Begusarai, District- Begusarai.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh For the Respondents : Mr. ARVIND UJJWAL SC4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present 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, Teghra vide Memo No. 388 dated 28/10/2017 whereby and whereunder licence of the petitioner's Fair Price Shop bearing No. 12/2008 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."

Patna High Court CWJC No.19228 of 2017 dt.10-04-2018 2/3

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a short submission to assail the impugned order on the ground that the opinion of the Block Supply Officer, Teghra through his letter no. 146 dated 13.09.2017 was submitted to the S.D.O., Teghra and relied upon in the impugned order but the copy thereof 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 11 of the writ petition that the impugned order of cancellation of licence has been passed without providing a copy of the opinion of the Block Supply Officer, Teghra 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 opinion of the Block Supply Officer, Teghra 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 opinion of the Block Supply Officer, Teghra to the petitioner has resulted in violation of natural justice and thus the decision making process stands vitiated. The impugned order dated 28.10.2017 (Annexure-1) is hereby quashed and the matter remanded to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Teghra for taking decision afresh in the

Patna High Court CWJC No.19228 of 2017 dt.10-04-2018 3/3 matter after supplying a copy of the opinion of the Block Supply Officer, Teghra 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 opinion of the Block Supply Officer, Teghra 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. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 14.04.2018 Transmission Date N.A.