Allowed

Parvati Devi @ Parwati Devi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Oct 2021CWJC/5145/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the order cancelling the Petitioner's P.D.S. license. The court held the Sub- Divisional Officer failed to apply his independent mind by solely relying on the Assistant Supply Officer's recommendation. Liberty was granted for a fresh order to be passed within four weeks. Note: Subject tags assigned based on context of food license/deceased

What did the court decide?

The impugned order cancelling the P.D.S. license is quashed. Liberty is granted to the Sub-Divisional Officer to pass a fresh order within four weeks after applying an independent mind.

Parvati Devi @ Parwati Devi Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5145 of 2021

¶2

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

¶3

Parvati Devi @ Parwati Devi W/o Vijay Kumar Resident of Village/ Moh.Sameer Takya, Ward No. 11, Gaya Town, Police Station- Rampur, DistrictGaya.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Department of Food and Consumers Protection, Government of Bihar, Patna

¶7

The District Magistrate, Gaya.

¶8

The Sub- Divisional Officer, Sadar Gaya.

¶9

The Assistant Districty Supply Officer, Sadar Gaya.

¶10

The Block Supply Officer, Town Block, Dist.- Gaya.

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

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

¶13

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Binay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Upendra Pratap Singh, AC to SC 4 ======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER

¶15

2 21-10-2021

¶16

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Upendra Pratap Singh, learned AC to SC 4 appearing for the State.

¶17

The present petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 29.06.2020, whereby and whereunder the P.D.S. license of the shop of the deceased husband of the petitioner bearing License no. 148 of 2016 has been cancelled.

¶18

The short issue raised for consideration by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that a bare perusal of the impugned order dated 29.06.2020 would show that the decision of cancelling the P.D.S. license of the deceased husband of the

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.5145 of 2021(2) dt.21-10-2021 2/3

¶20

petitioner has been taken on the basis of the recommendation made by the Assistant District Supply Officer, Sadar, Gaya contained in his letter dated 27.02.2020, hence it is apparent that the S.D.O. Sadar, Gaya has not applied his independent mind, resulting in the impugned order being vitiated in the eyes of law.

¶21

The learned counsel for the respondent State has not disputed the position, as is existing in law.

¶22

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the licensing authority i.e. the S.D.O. Sadar, Gaya who was/ is required to take a decision by applying his independent mind and that too, after considering the reply furnished by the P.D.S. dealer, has acted solely on the basis of the recommendation of the Assistant Supply Officer, Sadar, Gaya contained in his letter dated 27.02.2020, however has failed to apply his independent mind, much less furnish any cogent, succinct or clear reasons for coming to a decision regarding cancellation of the P.D.S. license of the deceased husband of the petitioner, thus the impugned order stands vitiated in the eyes of law, hence is quashed. However, the S.D.O. Sadar, Gaya is granted liberty to pass fresh orders after applying his independent mind as also upon consideration of the

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.5145 of 2021(2) dt.21-10-2021 3/3

¶24

reply submitted by the P.D.S. dealer, within a period of four

¶25

weeks from today.

¶26

The writ petition stands allowed.

¶27

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)

¶28

rinkee/-

¶29

Parvati Devi @ Parwati Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parvati Devi @ Parwati Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Singh Vs South Bihar Power Distribution Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Rajive Nandan Mourya, Vs The State Of Bihar

Dharmshila Kumari Vs The State of Bihar, through its the Principal Secretary of Food and Consumer Protection Department

Sikandar Mandal Vs The State Of Bihar Throgh The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Now The Department

Bipin Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Mangal Sharma Vs The State of Bihar