IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3606 of 2007 RAJESHWAR PRASAD YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 8.1.2010 The petitioner is a fair price shop dealer having licence no.4/88 granted under the provisions of Bihar Trade Article (Licenses Unification) Order. 1984. Initially the petitioner prays for quashing the order dated 4.9.2005, contained in Annexure-2, and order dated 9.1.2007, contained in Annexure-5, both passed by the S.D.O., Narkatiaganj, the licensing authority. The petitioner by filing an Interlocutory Application has challenged the order dated 26.3.2007 passed by respondent no.3, the licensing authority, canceling the licence of the petitioner without giving him any opportunity of being heard. The allegation in the show cause is that in May and July,2005 the petitioner did not supply some of the items to some of the card holders. The other allegation was that in June 2005, he supplied 14 Kgs of rice and 21 Kgs of wheat at a higher rate. The petitioner submits that after issuance of the suspension order, the licensing authority directed the B.D.O., Gaunaha to make an enquiry who in turn directed the Block Area Officer, Gaunaha to conduct an enquiry. The Block Area Officer did not find the allegation substantiated. The grievance of the petitioner is that though Block Area Officer did not find the allegations to be true, still the licensing authority on the same set of allegations asked for show cause as to why his licence be not cancelled. The petitioner has submitted his - 2 - KHAN reply dated 10.2.2007, contained in Annexure-6, stating therein that quite a number of card holders on account of paucity of fund did not lift their food grains which is still lying in stock. Counsel for the State submits that the petitioner did not produce the documents showing that he has supplied the items to the consumers/car holders. After hearing counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that the petitioner should be given one more opportunity to produce the relevant documents before the licensing authority in support of his case as his licence was cancelled on the ground that no document has been produced by him in course of the proceeding. This case is accordingly remitted back to the licensing authority for fresh adjudication of the matter after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. (S.P.Singh,J)