Patna High CourtCWJC/9060/2015disposed

Devendra Roy v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-08-09Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9060 of 2015 =========================================================== Devendra Roy son of Late Radhakrishna Roy, resident of village Jurawanpur, Barari, P.S. - Jurawanpur, Block Raghopur, District-Vaishali at Hajipur (Ex P.D.S. Dealer of Jurawanpur Barari Panchayat). .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariate, Patna - 1.

2. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur.

3. The District Supply Officer, Vaishali, at Hajipur.

4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Hajipur, District - Vaishali.

5. The Deputy Land Reforms Collector, Hajipur.

6. The Assistant District Supply Officer, Hajipur.

7. The Block Supply Officer, Raghopur District Vaishali. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Aditya Narayan , Mr. Akhilesh Kr. Sinha, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr. Satyendra Rai, AC to SC30 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09-08-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs - "(A) For quashing the order dated 12-04-2013 vide memo No. 03 (Annexure-5) illegally passed by the S.D.O. Hajipur respondent No. 4 cancelling the licence of the petitioner vide licence No. 05/07 without providing reasonable and adequate opportunity to file his effective reply against the vague allegation of non-distribution of Antyoday and B.P.L. food grains among some consumers for the year 2010-2011 (June 2010 to May 2011). (B) For issuance of a writ of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondent No. 4 to restore the licence

Patna High Court CWJC No.9060 of 2015 dt.09-08-2018 2/2 of the petitioner to its original position and allow the petitioner to run the shop as usual.

(C) For issuance of any other order/orders, direction/ direction for which this petitioner is entitled to under the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. Mr. Aditya Narayan, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed during the pendency of the writ petition and the same need not be pressed.

4. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 13.08.2018 Transmission Date N.A.