SATYADEO BAITHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

(2.) The petitioner is assailing the order dated 30.04.2014, (Annexure 9) contained in Memo No. 03, passed by the Licensing Authority, namely, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bettiah Sadar, by which the petitioner's show cause to the notice dated 19.04.2014 has been rejected without assigning any cogent reason.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in response to the notice dated 19.04.2014, which gave only three days' opportunity to answer the same, the petitioner gave a detailed reply on 27.04.2014 (Annexure 8), but the Licensing Authority, without considering the entire facts and circumstances, as detailed in the said reply, has rejected the petitioner's case and has proceeded to cancel his PDS licence virtually on non est grounds. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the entire order stands vitiated on account of the fact that the authorities have not only failed to consider the show cause of the petitioner but also have clearly violated the terms of the provisions of the Bihar Fair Price Shop Order, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Control Order, 2007'), which do not provide for cancellation as the provision of cancellation on lodging of an F.I.R. has been deleted in the 2011 Control Order. It has been submitted that earlier under Rule 7(iii), the provision of suspension/cancellation, which was available in the Bihar Fair Price Shop Order, 2007, has now been deleted by Notification of 2011.