Patna High CourtCWJC/10587/2013allowed

Raj Kumar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-08-14Mr. Justice Samarendra Pratap Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10587 of 2013 =========================================================== Raj Kumar Paswan, Son of Late Ganga Paswan, Resident of Village- Bakhri, West, P.S- Bakhari, District- Begusarai.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Collector cum District Magistrate, Begusarai.

2. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Bakhri, District- Begusarai.

3. The Block Supply Officer, Bakhri, District- Begusarai. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surinder Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Yadav, AC to SC-27 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 14-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

2. The petitioner is a P.D.S. dealer bearing license no. 22 of 2007 within Bakhari Block in the district of Begusarai.

3. He prays for setting aside the order dated 16.03.2013 passed by the appellate authority affirming the order dated 13.07.2013 passed by the licensing authority cancelling his license.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there were two allegations against the petitioner. Firstly; he did not give items for the month of April, 2012. Secondly; he committed irregularities in distribution of K. Oil and food-grains.

5. In his reply, the petitioner submitted that he has annexed Bank draft for lifting the food-grains, which has to be distributed in

Patna High Court CWJC No.10587 of 2013 dt.14-08-2015 2 / 2 the month of April, 2012. He further submits that he has annexed the statements of almost all the persons, who have made complaints. He further submits that the appellate authority has not considered the grounds taken in appeal.

6. I find that the consumers in their statements have stated that they do not have any complaint against the licensee.

7. In the result, this application is allowed and the impugned orders are set aside.

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