IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6891 of 2007 SANJAY KUMAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 4.1.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner assails the order 27.4.2007 passed by the Licensing authority by which he has cancelled the licence of the petitioner. The petitioner has assailed the impugned order on the ground that before canceling the licence, no show cause was given in terms of section 11(2) of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984. Sub-section (2) of section 11 of the Unification Order states that a show cause should be given before proposed cancellation of licence. He further submits that Annexure-6 would not amount to issuance of show cause in terms of section 11(2) of the Unification Order as there is no statement that the licence of the petitioner is being proposed to be cancelled. Annexure-6 is an order suspending the licence and asking the petitioner to bring all concerned documents. Mr. P.K. Verma, learned State counsel submits that various complaints regarding violation of terms of the conditions of licence were received against the petitioner and as such the latter was fully aware of the charges. The licence has been cancelled as various allegations stood proved against him. He submits that the order dated 5.10.2006, contained in Annexure-6, would amount to proposed show cause for canceling the licence. He further submits that the petitioner - 2 - KHAN has an alternative remedy by way of appeal. In view of the points raised, I am not going into the merit of the allegations made against the petitioner. In my view clause 11(2) of the Unification Order clearly mandates that the authorities before canceling the licence must specifically state in show cause notice that the same is being issued for purposes of cancellation of licence. There is no material on record to show that show cause for cancellation of licence was given in this case. In these circumstances, this court finds that the impugned order dated 27.4.2007 passed by the licensing authority is in teeth of clause 11(2) of the Unification Order and as such the same is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the licensing authority to proceed afresh in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the allegations made against the petitioner. In the result, this writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. (S.P.Singh,J)