KASHI RAM BANSHIDHAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR WITH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M /s Kashi Ram Banshidhar was a partnership firm of very long standing. It had a wholesale licence originally granted under the Bihar Kerosene Oil Dealer Licensing Order and family members were the partners. It was appointed a dealer for kerosene oil by the Indian Oil Corporation and the dealership at Begusarai. It may be mentioned here that by passage of time different members of the family died or retired from the firm and different members of the family stepped in but the firm continued to be the dealer and the licensee.

(2.) IT appears that pursuant to certain allegations the Collector, Begusarai, who is the Licensing Authority, cancelled kerosene oil licence of the petitioner firm. Petitioner appealed to the Commissioner, Munger Division, which appeal was also dismissed by order dated 23.12.2004. Petitioner then filed a writ petition before this Court being C.W.J.C. No. 4578 of 2005, challenging the order of the Collector and the Commissioner. This Court by order dated 26.3.2007 set aside the order of the Collector and the Commissioner and issued a direction for restoring the wholesale licence of the petitioner firm. When the petitioner 'ssupply was not restored, petitioner has filed this writ petition. State has filed a counter affidavit. In which, it is stated that in pursuant to orders of this Court the licence has been restored. After restoration of licence the District Authorities, Begusarai informed Indian Oil Corporation through its Divisional Manager, Begusarai vide letter no. 215 dated 2.5.2007 about the restoration. It is stated that licence now stands in the firm name with proprietor Sri Narayan Prasad Suitania, one of the sons of Purshottam La! Suitania. In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner further stated that there being family partition after the death of Purshottam Lal Suitania, this business has been allotted to other son Shiv Kumar Suitania and all applications have already been filed to the Indian Oil Corporation in this regards.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Indian Oil Corporation (IOC). Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the Indian Oil Corporation submits that in view of the new guidelines issued by Ministry of Petroleum the unit had remained inoperative could not be revived after three years, as such, IOC is within its right not to resume supply.