IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14695 of 2009 SHIV PRASAD YADAV S/O LATE MOHAN YADAV VILL- RAFFIPUR, P.S. HUSSAINGANJ, DISTT. SIWAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY DEPTT. OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR SIWAN 4. DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER SIWAN 5. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER SIWAN, SADAR, SIWAN 6. DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER SIWAN 7. BLOCK SUPPLY OFFICER HASANPURA BLOCK, SIWAN 8. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER HUSSAINGANJ BLOCK, SIWAN 9. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER HASANPURA BLOCK, SIWAN 10. RAMAYAN THAKUR, MUKHIYA OF GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, SAHULI S/O LATE SEO SHARAN THAKUR VILL- SAHULI, P.S. HUSSAINGANJ, DISTT. SIWAN 11. NAGENDRA KUMAR S/O NOT KNOWN PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ SAHULI, P.S. HUSSAINGANJ, DISTT. SIWAN ----------- 02. 10.12.2009 Petitioner is a dealer under the Public Distribution System in village Raffipur under Gram Panchayat Raj Sahuli in the District of Siwan. Being a distributor under the Public Distribution System, from time to time he is allotted foodgrains which are required to be distributed under National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. It appears that he had been entrusted with 151 quintal of rice which is alleged to have been misappropriated by the petitioner. The Block Development Officer, Hasanpura block issued notice to him in this regards. Petitioner showed cause specifically stating that the stock of 151 quintal of rice was handed over by him to the Mukhiya of Sahuli Gram Panchayat under due receipt granted by the Mukhiya. Upon enquiry the Block 2 Development Officer appears to have submitted report to the Collector who ordered the Sub-Divisional Officer to take appropriate Action and lodge a First Information Report in the matter. Now the Sub-Divisional Officer who is the Licencing Authority under the Fair Price Shop Order, 2007 issued by the State Government has issued notice to the petitioner to show cause as to why his licence should not be cancelled and because a criminal case has already been instituted his licence has been suspended. Sri. Basant Choudhary, learned counsel appearing in support of the writ petition submits that once the Block Development Officer had enquired into the matter and petitioner has given his explanation which was accepted, there was no cause of either instituting F.I.R. or initiating a proceeding so far as petitioner was concerned. In my view, in this case the question of fact has to be determined by the Sub-Divisional Officer, the Licencing Authority and the petitioner must file his detail explanation with whatever document he has in support thereof to establish his innocence. It is expected that the Sub-Divisional Officer who is the Licencing Authority would apply his independent mind and not be squad for any observation and or direction by the Collector in that regard and he should dispose off the proceeding at an early date preferably within a period of two months from 3 the date of production of a copy of this order before him. With this observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed off. Shageer (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J)