Ram Bahadur Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16570 of 2014 =========================================================== Ram Bahadur Singh, S/o Nageshwar Singh, Resident of village - Jimari, Gram Panchayat-Nautanwa, Block-Bagaha - 2, P.S. Bagaha, District - West Champaran .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, West Champaran

2. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah

3. The District Supply officer, West Champaran, at Bettiah

4. The Licensing Authority-cum-Sub-Divisional Officer, Bagaha, District West Champaran

5. The Assistant District Supply Officer, Bagaha, District - West Champaran

6. The Block Supply Officer, Bagaha - 2, West Champaran .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Raghwendra Kumar, SC 22 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 24-07-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs - "(A) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order/s, direction, quashing the order dated 15.04.2014 passed by the Respondent No. 4 as contained in Memo No. 87, dated 16.04.2014 whereby and whereunder the license no. 77/2007 of the petitioner has been cancelled with immediate effect without considering his show cause in right perspective in as much as all the aggrieved consumers have sworn affidavit to the effect that they have got no grievances with the petitioner.

(B) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or

Patna High Court CWJC No.16570 of 2014 dt.24-07-2018 2/2 any other appropriate writ, order/s, direction commanding the respondents for the following:- I. To treat the annexure-4 to the petition to be nullity and non-est in the eye of law.

II. To hold that the impugned order has been passed without considering the show cause/explanation of the petitioner in its right perspective.

(C) For any other relief/s to which the petitioner is found entitled to."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievances of the petitioner have been redressed during the pendency of the writ petition and hence the same need not be pressed.

3. The writ petition accordingly stands dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 26.07.2018 Transmission Date N.A.