IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3786 of 2008 MURARI SAH Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS With CWJC No.4007 of 2008 MUKHLAL RAM Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 02 15/07/2008 In both the writ applications short contention of learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners is that the impugned order contained in Annexure-1 dated 2.5.2005 and 13.5.2005 respectively, shows total lack of application of mind on behalf of the licensing authority who is Sub Divisional Officer, Bettiah, West Champaran. By a very cryptic order and by stating one sentence that the show cause has not been found to be satisfactory, the licence in question has been cancelled. The Court finds substance in the contention of the petitioners. In exercise of power, quasi judicial in nature, by a licensing authority he must disclose his mind as well as the material on which the conclusion has been reached. Merely rejecting the show cause as not being satisfactory may not be enough especially in cases where several issues have been raised by the party to the dispute. In the interest of justice, therefore, the two impugned orders are quashed and the matter is remanded back to the Sub Divisional Officer, Bettiah for an early adjudication to the matter if the petitioners render assistance in the litigation. Both the writ applications are allowed to the extent indicated above. rkp (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) - 2 -