Vibha Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.546 of 2019 ====================================================== Vibha Devi W/o Jitendra Kumar Singh, Resident of Village- Masadihi, P.S.- Gaurichak, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Food & Consumer Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna

2. The S.D.O., Patna City.

3. The A.D.S.O., Patna City.

4. The Block Supply Officer, Fatuha, Patna.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Anand, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Upendra Pratap Singh, AC to SC 4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 19-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

Petitioner is aggrieved by the order as contained in Memo No. 853 dated 29.09.2018 passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna City whereby the license of the petitioner for public distribution shop has been cancelled with immediate effect.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a perusal of the impugned order (Annexure-7) would show that even though the petitioner had submitted her reply to the show cause notice and the issues raised therein has been taken note of by the Sub-Divisional Officer, in the subsequent paragraphs he has not considered the plea of the petitioner by stating that the petitioner has not produced any evidence in support of her case. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner had submitted her show cause reply and that was required to be considered.

Patna High Court CWJC No.546 of 2019(3) dt.19-02-2019 2/2 Having gone through the impugned order, learned counsel for the State agrees that the writ application may be disposed of at this stage itself without waiting for any counter affidavit as it is evident from the records that the show case reply of the petitioner has not been considered.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order as contained in Annexure-7 cannot sustain the test of law. The order suffers from vice of non-consideration of the materials available on the record. It is, thus, set aside. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna City will be at liberty to consider the whole matter afresh giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and upon consideration of her reply to the allegations, a reasoned order shall be passed within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The application stands allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove.

If the decision is not taken within the aforesaid period of 90 days or the Sub-Divisional Officer is otherwise the satisfied that the allotment is required to be restored, the allotment of the petitioner shall be restored.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/- U