Md. Masiuzzama v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9382 of 2016 =========================================================== Md. Masiuzzama Late Abdul Rajjaque, resident of Village girda, Pancayaty Hasi Begampur, P.S and Anchal Jalalgarh and District Purnea. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, department of Food and Consumer Protection, Old secretariat, Patna.

2. The collector-cum-district Magistrate, Purnea.

3. the Sub-divisional Officer, sadar, Purnea.

4. The Block Supply Officer, Jalalgarhm, District Purnea. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Agrawal For the Respondent/s : Mr. AAG12 R.N. DUBEY =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order contained in memo no. 125 dated 17.04,.2014 passed by the SubDivisional Officer, Sadar, Purnea and the appellate order dated 29.01.2016 in Supply Appeal No. 64/14 passed by the Collector-cumDistrict Magistrate, Purnea by which the licence of the petitioner's Fair Price shop bearing no. 06/2007 has been cancelled and monthly allotment has been stopped; and further to restore the petitioner's licence.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a short submission

to assail the impugned order on the ground that a copy of the enquiry report was not made available to the petitioner and he was never confronted with the same with an opportunity of being heard or adducing evidence in that regard. A specific stand has been taken in para 17 of the writ petition that the impugned order of cancellation of licence has been passed without providing a copy of the enquiry report to the petitioner, though the same had been relied upon in the impugned order. Such infirmity could not be cured in the appeal as well.

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

5. In the above view of the matter, this Court is satisfied that non-supply of the enquiry report to the petitioner has resulted in violation of natural justice and thus the decision making process stands vitiated. The impugned order dated 17.04.2014 (Annexure-3) and the appellate order dated 29.01.2016(Annexure-4) are hereby quashed and the matter remanded to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Purnea for taking decision afresh in the matter after supplying a copy of the enquiry report to the petitioner and granting an opportunity of hearing in accordance with law. Supplies to the petitioner shall be restored without delay until fresh orders are passed by the respondent no. 3.

6. It is made clear that in case the stand of the petitioner

denying receipt of the enquiry report prior to order of cancellation being passed is found to be incorrect, the respondents shall be at liberty to approach this Court for recall of this judgment.

7. The writ petition stands allowed as above. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 14.07.2018 Transmission Date NA