IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1547 of 2010 1. MAHENDRA CHOUDHARY S/O LATE HARI CHOUDHARY R/O VILL-BARAKAR, P.S- RAJGIR, DISTT- NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRTARY, DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF 3. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, RAJGIR, BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA 4. THE MARKETING OFFICER, RAJGIR, BIHARSHARIF, DISTT- NALANDA 5. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFIER, SILAO, RAJGIR, NALANDA ----------- 02. 29.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and for the State. The petitioner is a P.D.S. licensee. He is aggrieved by the order dated 16.5.2007, suspending his license which continues. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents on 7.2.11. It acknowledges that the suspension continues to contend that on 15.10.2010 recommendation has been made for cancellation proceedings. The petitioner filed the writ petition on 28.1.2010. It is very apparent that the respondents suddenly woke up to the need for their duty, thereafter on 15.10.2010 while they were sleeping over the matter from 16.5.2007 after having suspended his license. The counter affidavit unfortunately is completely silent on the own statutory powers of the respondents to continue and justify 2 the suspension. The counter affidavit has been filed in a manner to fulfil the formality of filing a reply before this Court without accepting responsibility for the statements made in the counter affidavit and leaving it to the Court to decide matters. That is exactly what the National Litigation Policy 2009 prohibits. On the own showing of the respondents, the suspension order of the petitioner lapsed by operation of law on 15.8.2007 under Clause-7 Sub-clause-5 of the Fair Price Shop Order 2007 issued under the Public Distribution System Control Order 2001. The petitioner is held entitled to resumption of supply in accordance with law. The Court has made no observation on the proposed cancellation proceedings. It is for the respondents to decide on that aspect of the matter. The writ application stands allowed. P.K ( Navin Sinha, J.)