None appears on call for the petitioner. However, Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate appearing for all the respondents is present.

¶21

In brief, the case of the petitioner is that he has a ration shop at Kakopathar in Tinsukia district. After inspection was made at the ration shop on 15.05.2010, a show-cause notice dated 22.06.2010 was issued to the petitioner, which contains major allegations like supply of less food articles, diversion of the articles to black market and making false entries in the shop register, etc. The reply of the petitioner was found unsatisfactory and accordingly, the PDS license of the petitioner was not renewed. Thereafter, by order dated 30.11.2010, the Assistant Director of Food and Civil Supplies, Tinsukia had cancelled the PDS license of the petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Tinsukia and the said authority, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, by order dated 26.09.2013, had upheld the order dated 30.11.2010, by which the PDS license of the petitioner was cancelled and the appeal was rejected. Thereafter, the matter was taken up in appeal before the Commissioner, Upper Assam Division and the said appellate authority, by order dated 17.10.2013 had rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner.

¶22

The learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate has submitted that the

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

petitioner was put to notice about the allegations that were available against him. By referring to the order dated 26.09.2013, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Tinsukia, it was submitted that the petitioner was a habitual offender and had regularly diverted the PDS commodities allotted to him in the black market and therefore, the learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate has supported the appellate order as well as the order of cancellation of the PDS license of the petitioner.

¶25

Be that as it may, as that the petitioner was absent when the matter was previously listed on 29.11.2018 and 31.08.2022, and again today the petitioner is absent on call, the Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is not interested to pursue this writ petition.

¶26

Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Bimal Agarwalla v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Bimal Agarwalla v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of India and Anr. Vs M/S Cc Construction and 5 Ors.

Board of Directors of Dhubri Wholesale Consumers Co-Operative Stores Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Tahidur Rahman Vs the State of Assam

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs the United Bank of India and 5 Ors.

Anukul Barman Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Radheshyam Choudhary and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.