Shyama Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13928 of 2016 =========================================================== Shyama Devi W/o Late Nagendra Prasad Resident of village - Nimi, Gram Panchayat - Nimi, P.S. Fatehpur, District - Gaya .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Gaya

2. The Collector, Gaya

3. The Sub - Divisional officer, Sadar, Gaya

4. The Block Supply officer, Fatehpur, Gaya .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. N. K. Agarwal, Sr. Advocate Mr. D. N. Tiwari, Advocate For the State : Mr. S. Raza ahmad- AAG 5, Mr. Vishwambhar Pd., A.C. to A.A.G. 5 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 01-09-2016 Heard parties.

Sole ground taken by the petitioner for assailing Annexure 3 which is an order dated 26.07.2016 passed by the Licensing Authority-cum- sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar Gaya cancelling the PDS licence, is that unless show cause notice issued to the petitioner discloses its purpose that it was being issued for a proceeding of cancellation of licence, the licence cannot be cancelled. This issue is no longer res integra as this Court on several occasions has held that unless specific notice is issued for cancellation of licence it cannot be held that adequate opportunity was granted to

Patna High Court CWJC No.13928 of 2016 dt.01-09-2016 2 / 2 the licensee for making out his case as per the mandate of Clause 7(ii) of the Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001. A reference is made to an unreported judgment dated 12.07.2015 rendered by this Court in C.W.J.C. No.2488 of 2014 (Jagat Narayan Singh Vs. the State of Bihar & Ors.).

Accordingly, this writ application succeeds on the aforesaid sole ground. The impugned order as contained in Annexure 3 is quashed and set aside. As consequence thereof, the licence of the petitioner has to be restored immediately. However, this order would not come in the way of the Licensing Authority in launching a fresh proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that petitioner has violated any provision of the PDS(Control) Order, 2001 or terms and conditions of the licence etc. but in such case, reasonable opportunity would have to be granted to the petitioner.

(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) Sanjay-II/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 14.09.2016 Transmission Date NA