IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9619 of 2008 Girani Ram son of Late Lakhan Ram, resident of village Jamal Bigha, P.S. and District Sheikhpura……..Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Secretary, Department of Food and Consumer protection, Government of Bihar Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Sheikhpura 4. The Subdivisional Officer, Sheikhpura…….Respondents. For the petitioner : M/s Ajay Kr. Thakur, Md. Imteyaz Ahmad and Amir Alam, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Suresh Kumar, AC to SC-7 ----------- 03/ 05.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and its authorities. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 29.03.2008 (Annexure-1) by which Sub-Divisional Officer, Sheikhpura (respondent no.4) cancelled petitioner’s Kerosene Thela Vendor Licence No.05/85. 3. This matter has a chequred history, as the petitioner was convicted for offences punishable under sections 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code vide judgment dated 17.03.2004 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura and the said conviction was affirmed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Munger vide his judgment dated 16.01.2007 (Annexure-2) passed in Cr.Appeal No.49 of 2004. The said appellate order is under challenge in Cr. Revision No.196 of 2007 which is pending in this court after being admitted on 15.03.2007 (Annexure-3). 4. It further transpires that the matter was brought to the notice of Lokyukta, Bihar, Patna whereafter the Deputy Secretary 2 of Lokyukta Secretariat sent a letter dated 30.07.2007 (Anneuxre- 5) to the District Magistrate, Sheikhpura (respondent no.3) asking him to hold enquiry and submit a report. After receiving the said directions, a letter was sent by the office of the District Magistrate, Sheikhpura on 07.08.2007 (Annexure-6) to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sheikhpura (respondent no.4) to hold enquiry and submit his report within one week. 5. Thereafter it transpires that an opportunity was given to the petitioner to place his case, whereafter he filed his show-cause dated 20.08.2007 (Annexure-7) before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sheikhpura (respondent no.4) in detail. Finally the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sheikhpura (respondent no.4) submitted his report dated 31.10.2007 (Annexure 8) to the District Magistrate (respondent no.3) through Officer on Special Duty (Confidential), Sheikhpura. Thereafter, the District Magistrate, Sheikhpura (respondent no.3) sent a letter dated 15.03.2008 to the Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department stating the entire matter for appropriate directions and subsequently the Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Government of Bihar (respondent no.2) sent a letter dated 20.03.2008 directing that petitioner’s licence be cancelled with immediate effect. It transpires that the impugned order dated 29.03.2008 (Annexure-1) was passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sheikhpura (respondent no.4) cancelling petitioner’s licence which is under challenge in the instant writ petition. 3 6. From the facts and circumstances of this case it is quite apparent that on the direction of the Lokyukta, an enquiry in detail was made by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sheikhpura (respondent no.4) after giving due notice to the petitioner who appeared and filed his show-cause and only thereafter the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sheikhpura considered the entire matter in detail applying his independent mind and only then submitted his report dated 31.10.2007 (Annexure-8) finding several irregularities of the petitioner apart from being convicted in the criminal case as well as violation of the provisions of law governing such licence by the petitioner, according to which his licence was fit to be cancelled. Although, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that criminal case against the petitioner was not for violation of any provision of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984 and the impugned order dated 29.03.2008 was passed without application of mind merely on the directions of the higher authorities, but it is quite apparent that this is not a case of order of suspension which has to be passed during the pendency of any criminal case for violation of any provision of the said Order, rather this is a case of cancellation of licence for which the aforesaid ground as well as the other grounds were sufficient for cancelling the petitioner’s licence. 7. So far the question regarding the impugned order being passed without application of mind dated 29.03.2008 (Annexure- 1) on the basis of directions of higher authorities is concerned, it is 4 quite apparent that the authorities have given directions on the basis of the report (31.10.2007) of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sheikhpura himself in which the matter was decided after application of independent mind after hearing the petitioner and considering his show-cause and hence order dated 29.03.2008 (Annexure-1) passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Shekhpura has to be read along with his report dated 31.10.2007 (Annexure-8). 8. In the said circumstances, this court does not find any illegality in the impugned orders of the authorities concerned. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. harish/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )