IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.276 of 2011
GANESH PANDEY VILLAE SAKHAURA, POLICE
STATION PATSARA VIA AND POLICE
STATION PIAR, MUZAFFARPUR.
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MUZAFFARPUR
3. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER EAST MUZAFFARPUR
4. THE BLOCK SUPPLY OFFICER, BANDARA,
MUZAFFARPUR.
-----------
2 23.06.2011. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner prays for quashing of the order
dated 25.8.2010, Annexure 5, passed by the Sub
Divisional Officer, East Muzaffarpur canceling his
Licence No. 3 of 1988.
The petitioner is a dealer under the Public
Distribution System. He was granted retail licence for
food grains like Sugar, K.Oil etc vide Licence no. 3 of
1988 under the provision of Bihar Trade Articles
Licence Unification) Order, 1984. In course of
inspection on 29.2.2008 the enquiring officer reported
certain irregularities. On 6.3.2008 show cause notice
was served on the petitioner. On 13.3.2008 the petitioner
filed show cause denying the allegations. On 16.4.2008
the licence of the petitioner was suspended and was
2
asked to show cause as to why his licence be not
cancelled. The petitioner filed show cause on 2.5.2008.
by the impugned order dated 25.8.2010 licence of the
petitioner has been cancelled.
Learned counsel submits that once licence has
been suspended by way of punishment, no further
punishment in terms of cancellation of licence can be
inflicted in view of the decision of this Court rendered in
case of Md Idris Alam Vs. State of Bihar and others,
reported in 2010(4) PLJR 45. He submits that Public
Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 substitutes
Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984.
Counsel for the State submits that the very
PDS (Control) Order, 2001 on which the petitioner is
relying provides remedy of appeal. He also submits that
suspension order was interim in nature pending
proceeding for cancellation of licence.
I have heard the petitioner and the State.
Sub-clause (7) of Clause 11 of the PDS
(Control) Order, 2001 provides for an appeal. As such, I
do not want to go into the merits of the rival claims
made by the parties. The petitioner should approach the
3
appellate forum for redressal of his grievance.
As the petitioner was pursuing his remedy
before this court, the learned Appellate authority would
sympathetically consider his application for condonation
of delay in filing the appeal.
The writ petition is disposed of sympathetically.
Shashi ( S.P. Singh, J.)