VINAY KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 31.01.2017, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Dumka in License Appeal No. 10/2016-17 affirming the order contained in memo no. 197/2016 dated 10.11.2016, passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Dumka, whereby the petitioner's license for Public Distribution Shop has been cancelled.

(2.) The factual background of the case as stated in the writ petition is that the petitioner was running Public Distribution Shop in village Tulsi within the District of Dumka vide License No. 48/88. An FIR was lodged against the petitioner being Saraiyahat P.S Case No. 100 of 2016 alleging black marketing of Kerosene Oil. Thereafter, the Sub Divisional Officer, Dumka (respondent no.4) issued letter to the Block Supply Officer, Dumka (respondent no. 5) vide Memo No. 367 dated 02.07.2016 and directed to transfer the food grains from the shop of the petitioner to the shop of one Ramdeo Baitha. Thereafter, vide letter no. 120 dated 27.07.2016, the respondent no. 5 informed the respondent no. 4 that the shop of the petitioner was found closed and as such the food grains could not transferred to the shop of Ramdeo Baitha. However, it is claimed by the petitioner that as per the order of the respondent no. 4, the food grains from the shop of the petitioner was transferred to the shop of Ramdeo Baitha on 14.08.2016. Subsequently, the respondent no. 4 vide order contained in Memo No. 524 dated 17.08.2016 suspended the licence of the petitioner and a show cause notice was issued to him to explain the allegation against him. An enquiry report dated 14.10.2016 was submitted by the Block Development Officer, Saraiyahat to the respondent no. 4 vide letter no. 1385 and on the basis of the enquiry report, the license of the PDS shop of the petitioner was cancelled vide Order No. 197 of 2016 as contained in Memo No. 717 dated 10.11.2016 issued by the respondent no. 4. The petitioner challenged the order of cancellation of his PDS licence before the Deputy Commissioner, Dumka (respondent no. 3) vide License Appeal No. 10/2016-17 but the same was also rejected vide order dated 31.01.2017. In the meantime, the Criminal Case instituted against the petitioner vide Saraiyahat P.S case No. 100 of 2016 ended with submission of Final Form due to lack of evidence.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the impugned order of cancellation of PDS licence of the petitioner has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. It is further submitted that the criminal case instituted against the petitioner ended with submission of final form due to lack of evidence. It is also submitted that on perusal of the enquiry report, it would be apparent that no card holder has made any complaint against the petitioner, rather several card holders have given joint application on 21.07.2016 to the Block Development Officer, Saraiyahat stating about the innocence of the petitioner.