IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4531 of 2006 Ram Yatan Yadav Son of Late Fekan Yadav resident of village Khutaha, P.S. Gorodih District Bhagalpur … …… Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. District Magistrate, Bhagalpur 3. District Supply Officer, Bhagalpur 4. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar Bhagalpur 5. Block Supply Officer, Goradih Block, Bhagalpur …. Respondents For the Petitioner :M/s Gopal Prasad Roy & D.K. Pandey, Advocates For the State :Mr. Naresh Prasad, A.C. to SC-20 03/ 15.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner at the relevant time was a Fair Price Shop Dealer having Licence No. 58/85. His licence was suspended under order, bearing Memo No. 27 dated 14.2.2005, Annexure-1 as on the date of inspection his shop was found to be closed and he is alleged to have misappropriated 42 quintals of foodgrains for which a separate criminal case was also registered, bearing Sabour (Lodipur) P.S. Case No. 34 of 2005 for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. Later, petitioner approached the authorities and explained the reason for the closure of his shop on the date of inspection, whereafter the foodgrains found in his shop was distributed - 2 - through another dealer, Sri Ranjit Yadav. 3. This Court under orders dated 27.7.2007 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 20009 of 2007, Annexure-4 to the supplementary affidavit quashed the order dated 12.8.2005, passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur in connection with Sabour (Lodipur) P.S. Case No. 34 of 2005, whereunder cognizance for the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act was taken against the petitioner. In the light of the aforesaid order of the High Court, proceedings in the aforesaid criminal case has also been closed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur under orders dated 28.9.2007, Annexure-5. Licensing Authority without making reference of the orders of the High Court quashing the criminal case, proceeded to cancel the licence of the petitioner under order dated 14.3.2008, Annexure-6 to the supplementary affidavit. The Collector, Bhagalpur, who is the Appellate Authority, under order dated 10.5.2010, passed in Supply case No. 30 of 2008-09, Annexure-7 has taken notice of the order passed by the High Court quashing of the criminal case, but has refused to restore licence of the petitioner on the ground that - 3 - on the date of inspection, shop of the petitioner was found closed and he was found absent. 4. Once the criminal case alleging black-marketing of 42 quintals of foodgrains has been quashed, petitioner cannot be said to have committed offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. His licence has been cancelled for being absent only for a day, which, in my opinion, is too severe a punishment for being absent for a day. Accordingly, while setting aside the orders passed by the Licensing Authority dated 14.3.2008 and Appellate Authority dated 10.5.2010, Annexures-6 and 7, I direct the Licensing Authority to reconsider the matter and take a lenient view in the matter by granting one more opportunity to the petitioner to mend his ways. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)