IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14454 of 2008 ====================================================== Rajeev Kumar, son of Shri Sadanand Prasad yadav, resident of village Bairakh, Koshkapur Panchayat, Police Station Raniganj, District Araria .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Collector, Araria 3. The S.D.O., Araria .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. K.C.K.Sinha Mr. D.N.Tiwari For the Respondent/s : Mr. (GP19) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN) 3 04-11-2011 This writ application is restricted to the question as to whether the petitioner’s license could have been cancelled on the ground that the license was not recommended by the District Selection Committee. The petitioner was granted license under the Bihar Trade Articles Licences Unification Order, 1984. Section 4 of the Order deals with the issuance of license to the Public Distribution System Dealers. The Licensing Authority as per sub-clause (i) of Section 2 of the Order has been defined as a person not below the rank of the Sub Divisional Officer appointed by the State Government. The provision for grant of license by the District Selection Committee came into existence Patna High Court CWJC No.14454 of 2008 (3) dt.04-11-2011 2 / 3 2 by virtue of the Public Distribution (Control) Order, 2001 which was notified on 20th February, 2007. In the circumstances, the grounds mentioned for cancellation of the petitioner’s license in the order dated 20.12.2007 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Araria is quashed. This Court will also refer to the appellate order of the District Magistrate dated 12.02.2008. On perusal of the appellate order, it would appear that the District Magistrate has taken into consideration that the provision of the 2001 Control Order came into existence on 20.02.2007, however, while doing so, the District Magistrate has remanded the matter back to the Sub Divisional Officer to issue a fresh license to the petitioner if he fulfills the conditions of the 2001 Control Order. The petitioner has not violated any terms of the license and thus, it is wrong to hold that the petitioner’s license needs to be reconsidered and as such, the order of the District Magistrate remanding the matter back for reconsideration and granting a fresh license amounts to infliction of a punishment or to say the least, a declaration that the petitioner, for some unknown reason, has violated the conditions imposed at the time of granting license, which is not a fact! Patna High Court CWJC No.14454 of 2008 (3) dt.04-11-2011 3 / 3 3 In the circumstances, this Court quashes the order dated 20.02.2008 passed by the District Magistrate, Araria in Appeal No. 5 of 207-08 and directs the Sub Divisional Officer, Araria to restore the license of the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this order before the Sub Divisional Officer, Araria within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This writ application is allowed for the reasons mentioned aforesaid. Prabhakar Anand/- (Sheema Ali Khan, J)