Arvind Paswan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.4968 of 2015 dt.06-08-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4968 of 2015 =========================================================== Arvind Paswan S/o Ram Briksh Paswan Resident of Dhongila, P.S.- Banke Bazar, District- Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Gaya.

2. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sherghati, Gaya.

3. The Block Supply Officer, Banke Bazar, Gaya. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate. Mr. Dhananjaya Nath Tiwari Ms. Preety Kunwar, Advocates.

For the State : Mr. Md. Harun Quraishi, AC to SC-01 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 06-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 29.01.2015 issued under memo no. 40/Aa Sherghati dated 29.01.2015 by which the licence granted of the petitioner being license no. 157 of 2007 has been cancelled.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a short submission to assail the impugned order of cancellation, to the effect that the same has been passed mechanically and without due application of mind and without assigning any reason for such cancellation.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents appears and has been heard.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on careful consideration of the materials available on record, this Court finds merit in the writ petition. A bare perusal of the impugned order discloses

Patna High Court CWJC No.4968 of 2015 dt.06-08-2018 that the petitioner's P.D.S. licence has been cancelled on the sole ground that the show cause reply filed by him was not satisfactory, without however assigning a single reason whatsoever as to why the same was not found satisfactory. There is no discussion in the order with regard to the plea raised by the petitioner in his show cause reply and why the same did not find favour with the authority. In such circumstances, therefore, it must be held that the impugned order does not amount to a speaking order and is thus violative of the principles of natural justice which cannot be sustained in law.

6. Accordingly, the impugned order contained in Memo No. 40/Aa Sherghati dated 29.01.2015 (Annexure-1) passed by the SubDivisional Officer, Sherghati, Gaya (Respondent No. 2) is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded to him to consider and dispose of the matter afresh by a speaking order after grant of opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law. License of the petitioner shall be restored without delay until fresh orders are passed by the respondent no. 2.

7. The writ petition stands allowed as above. (Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/BT AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 08.08.2018 Transmission Date N.A.