IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5272 of 2006 JAI PRAKASH SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 8 2.12.2009 Rahman/ The petitioner has assailed the memo no. 478 dated 18.3.2006 issued by the Sub divisional Officer, Maharajganj contained in annexure-4 whereby he has cancelled the licence of Fair Price Shop of the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the licensing authority has not given any reason for accepting the report of the Inquiring Officer. He has not stated as to the illegality found in the inspection report. Learned counsel in support of his submission has relied upon a decision reported in 1998(3) PLJR , 903. Counsel for the State submits that price and stock register were not displayed and the complaint had been made against petitoner before the inquiring officer. He submits that the inquiring officer has recorded the statement of the petitioner and thereafter the licensing authority has given his reason for either accepting or rejecting the inquiry report. This writ application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority and in case such an appeal is filed the same would be disposed of preferably within the period of three months from the date of his filing as the matter is of the year 2005. Further more the appellate authority will consider the application for condo- nation of delay as petitioner was perusing his remedy before this court. With the above observation this writ application is disposed of. (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J) - 2 -