Shobha Kant Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1159 of 2015 ======================================================

1. Shobha Kant Ram Son of Late Bhola Ram resident of village - Bansgopal, P.S. Puraini, District - Madhepura .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Madhepura

3. The Sub Divisional officer, Udakishunganj Madhepura

4. The District Supply officer, Madhepura

5. The Block Development officer, Puraini District Madhepura .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. U.S.S. Singh, GP-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 23-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Although the petitioner questions the order dated 6.8.2014 bearing Memo No. 1924-2 whereby the Licensing Authority-cumSub Divisional Officer, Udakishunganj District-Madhepura has been pleased to cancel the licence of the petitioner bearing Licence No. 79 of 2007 issued under the Public Distribution Control Order, 2001 as enforced in the State of Bihar vide Bihar Fair Price Shop Order, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Control Order') but when the matter is taken up learned counsel fairly submits that a statutory appeal has been filed by the petitioner questioning the order of cancellation bearing Appeal No. 12 of 2014 which

Patna High Court CWJC No.1159 of 2015 (2) dt.23-04-2015 2 / 2 remains pending before the District Magistrate, Madhepura. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that the appeal questioning the order of cancellation remains pending before the appellate authority who in the present case is the District Magistrate, Madhepura, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, Madhepura to consider and dispose of the Appeal No. 12 of 2014 in accordance with law and after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. (Jyoti Saran, J) Bibhash/- U