IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1034 of 2010 In CWJC No. 13353 of 2009 With I.A. No. 5678 of 2010 ================================================ Shambhu Kumar, S/o Late Ram Bilash Sah, R/o Vill.- Sutihara Block, P.S.- Parihar, Distt.- Sitamarhi ….. (Petitioner)….. Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Divisional Commissioner, Muzaffarpur 3. The Collector, Sitamarhi 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Sitamarhi 5. The District Supply Officer, Sitamarhi 6. The Block Supply Officer, Parihar Block, Sitamarhi 7. The Block Supply Officer, Riga Block, Sitamarhi ..(Respondents) ……………………… Respondents. ================================================ Appearance: For the appellant: Mr V.R.P. Singh & Mr Rajan, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr Santosh Kr. Mishra, AC to GP VII. =============================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3. 08.09.2010. Re. I.A. No. 5678 of 2010. Heard the learned Advocates. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is made by the appellant for condonation of delay of 184 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the delay is condoned. 2 The Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Re. LPA No. 1034 of 2010. This Appeal preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent arises from the order dated 12th October 2009 made by the learned single Judge in the above CWJC No. 13353 of 2009. The license for a fair price shop granted to the appellant – writ petitioner under the Public Distribution supply scheme has been cancelled by the concerned authority. The cancellation of the license has been upheld by the appellate authority. The challenge before the learned single Judge has failed, therefore, the present Appeal. We have perused the reasons for cancellation of the license. It was the allegation against the appellant that he misappropriated the food grains supplied to him for distribution. He failed to account for the food grains received by him under the scheme. Learned Advocate Mr. V.R.P. Singh has appeared for the appellant. He has vehemently argued that the order of the appellate authority is a non-speaking order and calls for interference. He has also submitted that during the relevant time the petitioner was not well. He could not attend to the shop or maintain proper record. The allegation of misappropriation was totally unjustified. He has further submitted that the order of the appellate authority is a non-speaking order and is void ab initio. We see no substance in the submission made by the learned Advocate. The appellate authority, though has not made a long order, has recorded reasons for cancelling 3 the license. We agree with the learned single Judge. No case for interference is made out. The Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed in limine. Dilip ( R.M. Doshit, CJ ) ( Jyoti Saran, J )