IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9799 of 2006 Shiv Narayan Sahu @ Shubh Narayan Sahu, son of Late Kari Sah, village Dubyahi, PS Kishanpur, Dist. Supaul – Petitioner. Vs. 1) The State of Bihar, 2) Dist. Magistrate, Supaul. 3) Subdivisional Officer, Supaul. 4) Dist. Rationing Officer, Supaul. 5) Rupesh Kumar Sah, son of Late Kari sah, village Dubyahi, PS Kishanpur, Dist. Supaul – Respondents. 7 18.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State counsel and the counsel representing respondent no.5. The petitioner has prayed for cancellation of license no. 3/1997 granted to his brother respondent no.5 under the public distribution system after the death of his father Late Kari Sah . A criminal case was instituted against Late Kari Sah who was licensee under the public distribution system. The case was instituted in 1983. The petitioner who is the elder son of Late Kari Sah was working with him and was, thus, implicated in the criminal case. Finally the petitioner was acquitted on 15.12.2005. During the pendency of the criminal case Kari Sah died on 9.8.1997. This is a case in which the petitioner is claiming that when there is a provision for granting license on compassionate ground on the death of the licensee as would be apparent from Annexure 4 to the writ petition, the authorities should consider which of the family members is entitled to be granted the license. The facts reveal that respondent no.5 made a claim for grant of license. It is submitted that the petitioner who filed an 2 application for grant of license, the petitioner was not considered perhaps for the reason that he was involved in a criminal case along with his father. Both the petitioner and respondent no.5 have produced ‘no objection’ certificate along with their application granted by the mother. The no objection of the petitioner is at Annexure 3 which appears to have been notarized on 26.7.2003 whereas the no objection granted to respondent no.5 is at Annexure B/2 which appears to have been notarized on 10.3.1997. The petitioner has also annexed a petition which contains thumb impression of his mother Late Dhanwa Devi in which it is stated that respondent no.5 had obtained the ‘no objection’ certificate by misleading her. It is very difficult at this stage to decide as to which of the two ‘no objections’ should hold the field as Dhanwa Devi is no longer alive to substantiate either of the two ‘no objection’ certificates. The question therefore is, would the petitioner be entitled to be considered for grant of license on compassionate ground in preference to his brother, respondent no.5. These facts cannot be adjudicated by a writ court and, therefore, the petitioner, if so advised, may produce a copy of this order before the licensing authority who will examine the records and determine whether the petitioner had filed an application for grant of license on compassionate ground, whether the mother Dhanwa Devi had filed an application before him stating that her younger son had obtained the no objection by misleading her? I would like to observe that at the stage when the 3 license was granted, perhaps the authorities would not have granted the license to a person who was involved in a criminal case, but now, since the petitioner has been acquitted in the case, this should no longer be the consideration for grant of license, rather, an enquiry should be made regarding the fact which of the parties hold responsibility and look after the other members of the family, which is one of the considerations for appointment on compassionate ground. On an application being filed by the petitioner, along with a copy of this order, the licensing authority is directed to dispose of the matter after giving notice to respondent no.5 within four months after receipt of notice by respondent no.5. This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J .)