Allowed

Amir Rai v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC4 Dec 2014CWJC/10585/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a public distribution shop licence due to non-payment of renewal fees, the Patna High Court held that the default was not fatal given the petitioner's clean record. The court modified the cancellation order and directed the licensing authority to renew the licence upon payment of fees and a fresh application within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The impugned cancellation order is modified to direct the Licensing Authority to renew the petitioner's licence if he deposits up-to-date fees and applies within four weeks.

Amir Rai Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10585 of 2014

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Amir Rai, S/o Late Pyare Rai, resident of Village Gaus Nagar, P.S. Runi Shaidpur, District- Sitamarhi.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Collector of the District Sitamarhi. 2. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi.

¶6

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

¶7

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Satyapal Singh, AC to SC-15

¶8

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 04-12-2014

¶10

Heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Satyapal Singh, learned Assisting Counsel to Standing Counsel No.15 for the State.

¶11

The petitioner has questioned the order bearing Memo No.1 dated 2.3.2014 passed by the Licensing Authority i.e. the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi Sadar, whereby the licence granted to the petitioner bearing Licence No.01 of 2001 for running a shop under the public distribution system has been cancelled for non-deposit of the renewal fee within time.

¶12

The only issue that crops up in the present case is whether the non-deposit of renewal fee by the petitioner for whatsoever reason, is a default of such nature so as to shut the doors for the petitioner permanently.

¶13

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a senior

¶14

Patna High Court CWJC No.10585 of 2014 (2) dt.04-12-2014

¶15

¶16

citizen and being in advance age he had given money for deposit as renewal fee to a relative but the same was never deposited and which has resulted in the impugned order. He submits that there has been no deliberate laches on the part of the petitioner rather it is on account of his old age that he is facing such difficulty. He submits that right since the issuance of licence to the petitioner in the year 2001 until it has been cancelled by the impugned order, the petitioner has never been subjected to any proceeding for either violation of licence or any other irregularities.

¶17

Mr. Satyapal Singh, learned Assisting Counsel to Standing Counsel No.15 submitted that the impugned order is a natural consequence of non-deposit of the renewal fee and since it is an admitted position that the petitioner has not deposited the licence fee within the prescribed period there could not be any order.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and I have perused the records.

¶19

Clause 2.8 of the Bihar Fair Price Shops Order, 2007 issued under the Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 requires the licence renewal fee to be deposited within eight months of its validity. The provision though provides as such but does not withdraw the discretion vested in the statutory authorities to entertain such application where renewal is not

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.10585 of 2014 (2) dt.04-12-2014

¶21

¶22

applied within the prescribed time for the reasons not attributable to the licensee. In the present case as submitted by Mr. Kumar, the petitioner is a licensee since 2001 and has never been subjected to any proceeding for violation of the condition of the licence or any other irregularities. In such circumstances, in my opinion, even if there is a default on the part of the petitioner in deposit of the licence fee within the prescribed period, the default is not so fatal so as to disqualify him altogether from holding a licence especially when he is not charged with any other violation.

¶23

In the circumstances discussed, I do hold that if the petitioner deposits up-to-date licence fee for the past period as well as for the next five years and applies for renewal of his licence, the same shall be renewed by the Licensing Authority – cum- Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi Sadar in accordance with law provided such application is filed within four weeks from today.

¶24

The order bearing Memo no.1 dated 2.3.2014 passed by the Licensing Authority –cum- Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi Sadar stands modified to the aforesaid extent.

¶25

The writ petition stands disposed of with the directions aforementioned.

¶26

(Jyoti Saran, J)

¶27

SKPathak/-

¶28

Amir Rai v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amir Rai v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Union Of India and Ors. Vs Sri Din Dayal Gupta and Sons

Ramesh Kumar Vs The State Election Authority and Ors.

Ghana Ram Vs The State Election Authority ,bihar and Ors.

Rajeshwar Pandey Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Lord Shiva Temple and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sita Ram Agrawal Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.