Allowed

Amod Kumar Biswas v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC3 Apr 2014CWJC/12479/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenges the cancellation of the petitioner's fair price shop licence issued prior to the Public Distribution System Control Order 2001. The Court quashed the cancellation order and directed the respondents to restore or issue a fresh Form-II licence within four weeks, relying on analogous precedents.

What did the court decide?

The impugned orders of the Licensing Authority and the Appellate Authority were quashed. Directions were issued to restore the petitioner's licence or issue a fresh Form-II licence within four weeks.

Amod Kumar Biswas Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Consumer Protection | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12479 of 2013

¶2

====================================================== Amod Kumar Biswas son of late Nand Mohan Biswas resident of village Badholi, Police Station Palasi, Dist. Araria. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Collector, Araria. 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Araria. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 4 03-04-2014 Heard Mr. Uday Bhanu Roy for the petitioner and counsel for the State.

¶3

A supplementary affidavit has been filed enclosing there with copy of the licence.

¶4

The petitioner held a licence to run a fair price shop vide licence no. 42P/2006. It is the contention of the petitioner that the said licence was issued prior to coming into force of Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 ( for short ‘Control Order’) which was made effective w.e.f. 20^th of February, 2007.

¶5

The Licensing Authority by order dated 20.12.2007 (Annexure4) cancelled the said licence of the petitioner primarily on the ground that the same was issued without complying with the provisions and the procedure prescribed under the Control Order. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner filed appeal before the appellate authority vide Appeal No. 212 of 2007-08. The

¶6

Patna High Court CWJC No.12479 of 2013 (4) dt.03-04-2014

¶7

2/3

¶8

appellate authority by the order dated 12.2.2008 did not interfere with the order passed by the Licensing Authority . However, the appeal was disposed of by directing the Licensing Authority to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of fresh licence strictly in accordance with Control Order on priority basis. Aggrieved thereby the present writ petition has been filed.

¶9

Mr. Roy, counsel for the petitioner submits, which has not been denied by the respondent State and, in my view, fairly that the issues raised herein were raised in diverse writ petitions which have already been decided and as such the present application deserves to be allowed in the light of those orders. Several such orders have been enclosed as Annexure-6 series in order to support the contention of the petitioner that the provisions of the Control Order which was made effective from February 2007 could not have been applied in the cases where the licences were issued under the Unification order prior to coming into force of the Control Order. The objection taken in the counter affidavit with regard to issuance of certain directions before 20.2.2007 was also raised and considered in CWJC No. 22216 of 2011 and negated. The Court found that direction contained therein would be of no value. Be it recorded that the licence of the petitioner was cancelled not on account of

¶10

Patna High Court CWJC No.12479 of 2013 (4) dt.03-04-2014

¶11

3/3

¶12

violation of any of the terms and conditions of the licence but primarily on the ground that the same was issued without complying with the procedure laid down in the Control Order.

¶13

Regard being had to the above, I am satisfied that the present application be also disposed of in the terms in which CWJC No. 22216 of 2011 and analogous writ petitions were disposed of by this Court. Consequently, the order passed by the licensing authority (Annexure-4) as well as the appellate order dated 12.2.2008 (Annexure-5) are quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to restore the licence of the petitioner and/or issue a fresh licence in Form-II on depositing appropriate fee therefor as per the said provision within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶14

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)

¶15

Shyam/-

Amod Kumar Biswas v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amod Kumar Biswas 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Bharti Vs The Patna Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Kartik Prasad Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mukesh Kumar and Anr. Vs The Central Bank Of India, Patna andors.

Vinay Kumar Mishra Vs The Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. and Ors.

Kumari Anuradha Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Bibha Prasad Singh @ Biva Prasad Singh Vs The Chairman Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.