Meena Bharti v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15809 of 2013 ====================================================== Meena Bharti, Wife of Sri Surendra Prasad Yadav, Resident of Village - Hardi ( Purab )Tola, Chaughara, P.O. Hardi, P.S. Supaul, District - Supaul .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary Food and Consumer Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna

2. The Commissioner, Koshi Commissionery, Saharasa, District - Saharsa

3. The Collector, Supaul, District - Supaul

4. The Sub - Divisional Officer, Supaul, District - Supaul .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Avnish Nandan Sinha ======================================================

CORAM:

HONOURABLE MR.

JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-09-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 08.08.2009, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Supaul, which was affirmed in appeal and revision by the Collector, Supaul and commissioner, Koshi Division, Saharsa.

The fact of the case in short is that on allegations of preventions of terms and conditions of license, the petitioner's P.D.S. license was earlier suspended and thereafter cancelled. The petitioner submits that order of suspension and cancellation are mutually exclusive and both cannot be inflicted either simultaneously or one after giving other. In support of his submission, learned counsel has relied upon a Division Bench

Patna High Court CWJC No.15809 of 2013 (4) dt.17-09-2015 2 / 2 order dated 25.09.2013, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 10717 of 2008, heard analogous with batch of cases.

Counsel for the State submits that earlier Unification Order provided that a license can be suspended pending proposed proceeding for cancellation of license. He disputes Clause 11 of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order that pending cancellation proceeding, a license can be suspended under Clause 11 of 1984 Unification Order. However, the said provision has been omitted in the newly Control Orders of 2001, 2007 and 2011. As such, I find that the order dated 25.09.2013, of the Division Bench passed in C.W.J.C. No. 10717 of 2008 (Raghaw Sharan Pandey Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) fully cover the case of the petitioner.

In the result, this writ application succeeds, the impugned orders of all the three authorities are set aside and the license of the petitioner stands restored.

This application stands allowed.

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.) Uday/- U