Lagmania Devi @ Lagmaneey Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7729 of 2020 ====================================================== Lagmania Devi @ Lagmaneey Devi Wife of Late Jawahar Lal Ram, Resident of Village - Kopa, P.S. Kopa Bazar, District- Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra. 2.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar Chapra, Dist. Saran at Chapra. 3.

The Block Supply Officer, Jalalpur, District- Saran at Chapra. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.N.K. Agarwal For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Lalit Kishore ( Ag ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 19-03-2021 Heard Mr. N.K. Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State.

Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the SDO, Saran at Chapra in PDS License No. 18 of 2016. Mr. Agarwal has invited attention of this Court to the notice issued by the SDO contained in Annexure-1 and in the light of Annexure-1, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no indication in the notice that the SDO proposes to take any action of cancellation of PDS license and only on the basis of reply to the show cause notice, the respondent, SDO has taken decision to cancel the PDS licence.

He submits that the issue is no more res integra. Similar issue was decided by a Division Bench of this Court

Patna High Court CWJC No.7729 of 2020(3) dt.19-03-2021 2/2 reported in 2018 (4) PLJR 516.

In view of the fact that the Division Bench has accordingly decided the same issue and also the Court finds that the notice contained in Annexure-1 does not indicate the proposed action and without indicating the proposed action, the decision to cancel the PDS licence suffers from vice of non compliance of the principle of natural justice. Accordingly, the Court is of the view that the order of cancellation of PDS license contained in Annexure-3 cannot sustain, it is quashed. Consequential will follow. However, quashing of Annexure-3 will not disentitle the respondents from taking appropriate action if permissible under the law. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Ravi/- U