IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3079 of 2010 1. INTESAR AHMED S/O LATE SARFRAZ AHMED R/O MOHALLA- SHUMALI, P.S.- SHERGHATI, DISTT.- GAYA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SECRETARY, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SHERGHATI, GAYA 4. ASSISTANT DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, SHERGHATI (GAYA) 5. BLOCK SUPPLY OFFICER, SHERGHATI (GAYA) ----------- 2/ 12/05/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 31.12.2008 canceling his P.D.S. Licence No.497/07 in Supply Case No.88/08. A remedy of appeal being available, the Court could have disposed off the application on that basis, but for the fact that it has remained pending before the Court since 19.2.2010 and the respondents have also filed their counter affidavit. The petitioner took a defence of illness and sought permission to keep the shop closed for some time. The respondents either in the impugned order or in their counter affidavit have not disputed or denied his defence of illness. On the contrary, what they state is that it was not possible to keep the shop closed for a duration of 10 to 12 months as requested by the petitioner on grounds of his illness. Nothing has been stated as to why a temporary alternative arrangement could not have been made by attaching the petitioner’s 2 shop to another for that period if the defence of an illness was not a ruse, but a reality. The impugned order dated 31.12.2008 is accordingly set aside. The application is allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)