Partly allowed

Rajeshwar Mahto v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC25 Jul 2019CWJC/5063/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court quashed impugned orders cancelling the petitioner's license for violating procedural safeguards under Clause 11(2) of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984. The matter was remitted to the Sub-Divisional Officer afresh after a proper hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders quashed; license restored; matter remitted to Sub-Divisional Officer to pass a fresh reasoned order after hearing within three months.

Rajeshwar Mahto Vs The State of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5063 of 2019

¶2

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

¶3

Rajeshwar Mahto Son of Durup Mahto, Resident of Serahwa Bhuski, PS Matiyari Narkatiyanganj, West Champaran

¶4

... ... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Dept. Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The District Magistrate, West Champaran Bettiah

¶8

The Sub Divisional Officer, Narkityaganj, West Champaran, Bettiah

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

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

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Arvind Ujjwal (Sc4) ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 25-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

¶15

In the admitted facts of this case where the show cause notice as contained in Memo No. 878 dated 04.12.2013 (Annexure ‘1’) does not propose cancellation of license but after submission of the explanation the license of the petitioner has been cancelled which is in violation of Clause 11(2) of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984, learned counsel for the State submits that instead of calling for a counter affidavit this writ application may be disposed off remitting the matter to the Sub-Divisional-cum-Licensing Authority, Narkatiyaganj, West Champaran for passing a fresh reasoned order after giving an appropriate opportunity of hearing to the

¶16

Patna High Court CWJC No.5063 of 2019(2) dt.25-07-2019 2/2

¶17

show cause to the petitioner in accordance with the Rules.

¶18

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in view of the stand taken before this Court, the impugned orders as contained in Annexure ‘2’ and ‘3’ to the writ application are hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Narkatiyaganj, West Champaran for proceeding afresh by serving a proper show cause notice to the petitioner calling upon him to submit an explanation to the allegations and then pass a reasoned order within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶19

In the meantime, the license of the petitioner shall stand restored.

¶20

This writ application stands disposed off accordingly.

¶21

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶22

vats/ved

¶23

Rajeshwar Mahto v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeshwar Mahto 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

Systematic And Advance Construction Private Limited Vs The State of Bihar

Shashi Bhushan Paswan Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Vijay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Bali Paswan Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Rana Pratap Singh Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Rajesh Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.