IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO.3204 OF 2008 JAI SHANKAR UPADHYAY, SON OF LATE NARESH UPADHYAY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BASHOPUR, POLICE STATION KARAGAHAR, DISTRICT ROHTAS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER, PATNA DIVISION, PATNA 3. THE COLLECTOR, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 4. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SASARAM, DISTRICT ROHTAS 5. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, SASARAM, DISTRICT ROHTAS ********* 3 21/10/2011 Heard Counsel for the petitioner and the State. Perused the writ application as well as the counter affidavit. The petitioner’s license as a Public Distribution System Dealer has been cancelled on two grounds, it is stated that the petitioner was not present in his shop when the Additional District Supply Officer, Sasaram went to make the enquiry. It is said that a placard was stuck on the shop that the petitioner would be away from 11.10.1999 to 14.10.1999. It is alleged against the petitioner that the card holders, 11 in number, had made a complaint that they were given food items as well as Kerosene Oil but the amount of supply was not sufficient for them. The Enquiry Report which is Annexure-A to the counter affidavit itself indicates the supply received by the petitioner and the amount supplied to the card holders. Unless, these 2 figures are tallied, it cannot be said that the petitioner had not distributed the items that he was to distribute to the card holders. The enquiry, in my opinion, is rather perfunctory. The Inspecting Officer ought to have taken down the statements of the card holders and also record the amount of Kerosene Oil etc. supplied to them. After recording the statements and the supply entered in the cards of the card holders, the Enquiry Officer ought to have tallied it with the stock register to verify as to whether the petitioner has actually distributed the stock which he has received. In the circumstances aforesaid, this Court finds that the order of the cancellation of the license of the petitioner has been passed without holding a proper enquiry. Accordingly, the order impugned contained in Annexures 2, 3 and 4 are quashed and the Authorities are directed to issue fresh license to the petitioner. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sasaram may hold an enquiry if so advised with respect to the period under consideration in the manner indicated above. This writ application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )