BIVEKANAND SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 4,3.1997 (Annexure 5) passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Munger, Respondent No. 2 in Misc. (Supply Appeal) Case No. 5/96 -97 filed by the respondent No. 4 under Clause 28(1)(b) of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Unification Order) cancelling the petitioners Licence No. 7/96 for wholesale dealer for distribution of levy sugar issued by the Collector, Munger has preferred this writ petition.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that an application was made in prescribed form to the Collector, Munger who after making due enquiry granted licence No. 7/96 (Annexure 3) on 18.7.1996 under the Unification Order. Respondent No. 4, who had also been granted a licence and had been appointed by the State Government as a wholesale dealer for distribution of levy sugar in Tarapur Block preferred an application on 9.7.1996 before the Collector, Munger which was registered as Misc. Case No. 13 of 1996. making certain allegations and pointing out illegalities in the grant of licence to the petitioner, on the basis whereof allotment of levy sugar to the petitioner for distribution had been suspended by the order dated 1.10.1996. On 24.10.1996 a notice was issued by the Collector, Munger calng upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the licence granted to the petitioner be not cancelled on the grounds mentioned in the Notice to show cause (Annexure 1). The petitioner accordingly filed his reply and inter alia stated that there was no infirmity or illegality in the grant of licence to the petitioner whereupon the Collector by his order dated 29.1.1997 recalled the earlier order dated 1.10.1996 and directed the allotment of levy sugar to the petitioner for distribution as a wholesale dealer under the licence in question. Respondent No. 4 then preferred the appeal aforementioned before the Divisional Commissioner, Munger, respondent No. 2 who also issued directions for enquiry and after hearing the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 by the impugned order dated 4.3.1997 (Annexure 5) cancelled the licence of the petitioner.

(3.) NO counter -affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 but respondent No. 4 has filed the counter -affidavit and supplementary counter -affidavit.