LAWS(JHAR)-2014-8-29

PRADEEP KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Decided On August 28, 2014
PRADEEP KUMAR Appellant
V/S
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by order dated 15.10.2008 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas whereby the retail trade license No. 15/BRA/97 issued under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) order 1984 was cancelled and the order dated 11.08.2009 whereby the Misc. Appeal No. 125 of 2008 preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. The brief facts of the case shorn of unnecessary details are stated thus:

(2.) The Sub-Divisional Officer opined that in view of the irregularities noticed above, it appears that the petitioner was selling kerosene oil in black market and accordingly, he was directed to produce Stock Register, Sell Register and Unit Register for the year, 2007-08 and 2008-09. The license of the petitioner was suspended in the meantime, though no hearing was afforded to the petitioner before suspending the license. The petitioner submitted his reply on 04.08.2008 taking a specific plea that he was suffering from fever and that was the reason on 20.07.2008 the shop was closed. Along with reply dated 04.08.2008 a medical certificate and copies of Stock Register, Unit Register, Sell Register etc. were also submitted. The petitioner was further directed to file an affidavit and also a consolidated show-cause as the reply dated 04.08.2008 was found not satisfactory. In view of the verification made through Block Supply Officer another notice dated 28.08.2008 was issued to the petitioner for cancellation of the license. On 20.09.2008, the petitioner submitted a reply stating as under:

(3.) Vide letter dated 15.10.2008 the license bearing no. 15/BRA/97 issued to the petitioner was cancelled. Aggrieved by order dated 15.10.2008, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner under Clause 23 of the Unification Order and it was registered as Misc. Appeal No. 125 of 2008. The appeal was also dismissed vide order dated 11.08.2009 and therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court.