IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12433 of 2006 SUNIL KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 04.07.2008 The order dated 16.09.2006 contained in Annexure-3 is under challenge in the present application. By virtue of this order the Public Distribution System license of the petitioner has been cancelled. The primary contention which has been urged on behalf of the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that a mere perusal of the impugned order shows that it is a mechanical exercise of power by the licensing authority. It is a standard form order which has been cyclostyled and only names of P.D.S. dealers have been filled. There cannot be a better example of non-application of mind. It is also submitted at the bar that a large number of orders of the similar kind have been passed by the licensing authority and it may have led to the improvisation of procedure. The authorities have adopted a short-cut method for adjudication in the matter. The court is an agreement with the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. This is no way to exercise quasi judicial authority more so when it is statutory in nature. There has to be some application of mind by taking into consideration the ground urged on behalf of the petitioner or the explanation offered by him. This is a case which does require judicial intervention. The impugned order contained in Annexure-3 dated 16.9.2006 is hereby quashed with a direction to the Sub divisional Magistrate/Licensing Authority to hear the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders. The impugned order stands quashed and the writ is allowed. Mkr. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)