IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.276 of 2011 GANESH PANDEY VILLAE SAKHAURA, POLICE STATION PATSARA VIA AND POLICE STATION PIAR, MUZAFFARPUR. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MUZAFFARPUR 3. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER EAST MUZAFFARPUR 4. THE BLOCK SUPPLY OFFICER, BANDARA, MUZAFFARPUR. ----------- 2 23.06.2011. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner prays for quashing of the order dated 25.8.2010, Annexure 5, passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, East Muzaffarpur canceling his Licence No. 3 of 1988. The petitioner is a dealer under the Public Distribution System. He was granted retail licence for food grains like Sugar, K.Oil etc vide Licence no. 3 of 1988 under the provision of Bihar Trade Articles Licence Unification) Order, 1984. In course of inspection on 29.2.2008 the enquiring officer reported certain irregularities. On 6.3.2008 show cause notice was served on the petitioner. On 13.3.2008 the petitioner filed show cause denying the allegations. On 16.4.2008 the licence of the petitioner was suspended and was 2 asked to show cause as to why his licence be not cancelled. The petitioner filed show cause on 2.5.2008. by the impugned order dated 25.8.2010 licence of the petitioner has been cancelled. Learned counsel submits that once licence has been suspended by way of punishment, no further punishment in terms of cancellation of licence can be inflicted in view of the decision of this Court rendered in case of Md Idris Alam Vs. State of Bihar and others, reported in 2010(4) PLJR 45. He submits that Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 substitutes Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984. Counsel for the State submits that the very PDS (Control) Order, 2001 on which the petitioner is relying provides remedy of appeal. He also submits that suspension order was interim in nature pending proceeding for cancellation of licence. I have heard the petitioner and the State. Sub-clause (7) of Clause 11 of the PDS (Control) Order, 2001 provides for an appeal. As such, I do not want to go into the merits of the rival claims made by the parties. The petitioner should approach the 3 appellate forum for redressal of his grievance. As the petitioner was pursuing his remedy before this court, the learned Appellate authority would sympathetically consider his application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The writ petition is disposed of sympathetically. Shashi ( S.P. Singh, J.)