IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13247 of 2006 BIMAL KUMAR SINGH, son of Late Chatrughan Prasad Singh, resident of Village- Shamhaura, P.S. –Sonbarsa, District- Saharsa. . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Magistrate, Saharsa. 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Saharsa. 4. The District Supply Officer, Saharsa. 5. The Block Supply Officer, Saharsa. . . . . . . Respondents. ----------- 2/ 17.02.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner prays for setting aside the order dated 15.04.2006 passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Saharsa, as contained in Annexure-4, whereby his licence has been cancelled. Learned counsel submits that the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Saharsa has passed the order on the basis of enquiry report of a Departmental Committee headed by Under Secretary, Department of Food Supply and Commerce, as no such authorization under Clause 30 of Bihar Trade Articles (Licence Unification) Order, 1984 has been obtained. Thus, he submits that the impugned order relying on the Order, 1984 would be fallacious. Learned counsel for the State submits that the licence of the petitioner has been cancelled in view of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of PUCL Vs. Union of India & Ors bearing Writ Petition (Civil) No. 196 of 2001 disposed of on 02.05.2003, wherein certain directions have been given thereof. Heard counsel for the parties. I find that this application is pre-mature, as the petitioner has an alternative remedy by way of appeal under Clause 28 of the aforesaid Order. However, if application for condonation of delay is filed, the same would be - 2 - considered sympathetically, as petitioner was pursuing his remedy before this Court since 2006. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)