DHANI RAM RAJAK Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only for the consideration that since issuance of the order of suspension 90 days' have already passed and as per Clause 11 (2) of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Unification Order'), force of the order has lapsed.

(2.) IT has been stated that since the said order has lost its force, the licensing authority should have restored the licence of the petitioner and should have supplied the articles to the public distribution shop of the petitioner.

(3.) THE petitioner had filed reply to the show -cause notice as far back as on 5th August, 2006, but since, thereafter, no order was passed. It has been stated that under the provision of Clause 11(2) of the said Unification Order, licence can be suspended only up to 90 days. The respondents should have, thus, passed the order reviving his licence and should have supplied the articles to the petitioner's shop. The petitioner after lapse of the statutory period made repeated requests and representation, but no order has been passed and articles are not being supplied to his public distribution shop.