PRAHLAD KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has challenged the order dated 1.10.1999 as contained in Annexure 4 passed by the Sub -Divisional Officer, Porahat Chakradharpur, whereby and whereunder licence granted to the petitioner under the Provisions of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification Control) Order, 1984 has been cancelled.

(2.) PETITIONER 's case is that he is having Licence No. 16/84 granted under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification Control) Order, 1984 (hereinafter called the Unification Order, 1984) and is carrying on his business of running a fair price shop under the Public Distribution System in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Licence. Petitioner wascalled upon to show cause vide Letter No. 313 dated 21.8.1999 by the Sub -Divisional Officer, Porahat, Chakradharpur as to why his licence be not cancelled on the ground that he lifted 25 quintals of rice for the month of May, 1999 on 19.7.1999 and 25 quintals for June, 1999 on 22.7.1999 but he distributed only 4 kg. of rice per consumer instead of 8 kg. of rice. It was further alleged in the show -cause notice that during the inspection on 28.7.1999 petitioner was not present in his shop premises. Petitioner filed his show -cause on 9.8.1999 and clearly stated that he lifted 25 quintals of rice on 19.7.1999 for the month of May, 1999 and therefore he distributed 4 kg. of rice per consumer for May, 1999. Petitioner further lifted 25 quintals of rice for the month of June, 1999 and thereafter he distributed 8 kg. of rice for both May and June, 1999 and the same was entered in the Ration Card of the consumers. He further stated in his show -cause that on 28.7.1999, he had come to Food Corporation of India, Ranchi to lift the quota of Sugar which was also informed to the Food Supply Inspector, Goel Kera. However, dissatisfied with the show -cause the licence of the petitioner was cancelled by the impugned order and the same was communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 1.10.1999.

(3.) THIS matter was taken up on 23.1.2001. From perusal of the counter -affidavit it was found that respondents have not stated any where that the licence was cancelled by a reasoned order passed on 30.9.1999. The officer of the respondent was accordingly directed to produce the record of the case. Accordingly the record of the case was produced before this Court and supplementary affidavit was also filed annexing the copy of the order dated 30.9.1999. The impugned order dated 30.9.1999 reads as under : - - Abhilekh Upasthapit. ShriGupta Se spaslikaran prapta hua, jiska avalokan kiya. It is clear from the petition of the villagers and the clarification offered by the shop -keeper that the points raised in the report of the BSO are valid and that the clarification offered by the dealer (shop -keeper) is inadequate. Accordingly, his licence is cancelled due to violation of the terms and conditions. BSO Goelkera to take charge of the items in the dealer's charge and arrange for their proper distribution.'