IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11685 of 2009 Liyakat Ansari, Son of Late Fekoo Ansari, Resident of Village Maria Chhapar, P.O., P.S. & Anchal Piparasi, Subdivision Bagaha, District West Champaran. ----- Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, West Champaran at Bettiah. 3. The Sub-divisional Officer-cum-Licensing Authority, Bagaha, West Champaran. 4. The Block Supply Officer, Piparasi, Bagaha, West Champaran. --- Respondents. ----------- 3 20.9.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. Time was granted to the counsel for the State to file an affidavit in this case. The petitioner’s licence has been cancelled vide Annexure-8 by a reasoned order passed by the Sub-divisional Officer-cum- Licensing Officer, Bagaha on 24.3.2006. The allegations against the petitioner are that (a) his shop was closed (b) that because the shop was closed, the stock register etc. could not be examined (c) the price list was not displayed (d) that eight card holders had filed a complaint that they had not received their ration for the month and (e) that the petitioner had only distributed 660 litres of K. Oil in 15 days out of the total amount of 1360 litres of K. Oil provided by him. 2 The petitioner filed a show-cause in which he states that his daughter fell ill and he had to rush to the hospital. When he returned he produced all the documents for inspection of the concerned authority. It has further been stated in the show-cause that the K.Oil, food items etc. supplied through the petitioner were found tallying with the stock that he had received. The stock and sale register indicated that he had sold some of the items to valid card holders. The Sub- divisional Officer has rejected the plea of the petitioner that the remaining stock was available at his shop; there was discrepancy, he could not use the stock and that he was not present in his shop, due to the sudden illness of his daughter. The Sub-divisional Officer has also rejected the report of the Mukhiya on the basis of the fact that eight persons had complained against the petitioner. It has also been presumed by the Sub-divisional Officer that because the petitioner had only distributed 660 litres of K. Oil, he intended to sell the rest of the K. Oil in black market. I may state here that the order does not disclose that there was a discrepancy between 3 the stock in the shop and the items distributed to various card holders. The Sub-divisional Officer, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, has acted on the basis of presumptions and has wrongly rejected the plea of the petitioner. It cannot be presumed that bcause all the food items and articles that were to be distributed were not sold within 15 days the petitioner intended to sell them in black market or that he was in any way contravening the terms and conditions for grant of a P.D.S. Dealer’s licence. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of the Sub-divisional Officer has been rejected for the reasons as mentioned by the Sub- divisional Officer. As stated, this Court does not find that the reasons are reasonable and, therefore, this Court quashes the order dated 25.3.2006, passed in Case No. 03/05-06 and order dated 11.7.2008, passed in Appeal No. 01/2006-07. This application is allowed. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)