Patna High Court
Rajkumar Paswan vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 30 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.278 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1505 of 2019.
======================================================
Rajkumar Paswan, Son of Aamo Das, Resident of Village- Salonachak, P.S.
and District- Lakhisarai.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer
Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger.
3. The Collector, Lakhisarai, District- Lakhisarai.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Lakhisarai, District- Lakhisarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Alok Ranjan, A.C. to AAG 5.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR)
Date : 30-01-2021
Heard the parties.
Aggrieved by judgment and order dated 30.01.2019
passed by learned Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court passed in
C.W.J.C. No. 1131 of 2018 dismissing the writ petition
appellant/petitioner has preferred this L.P.A.
License of petitioner's fair price shop bearing no.
2/92 was cancelled by Sub-Divisional Officer, Lakhisarai by
order dated 06.11.2015 (Annexure-1) and appeal preferred was
dismissed by appellate authority by order dated 15.10.2016
Patna High Court L.P.A No.278 of 2019 dt.30-01-2021
(Annexure-4) and revision petition filed before the Revisional
Authority was dismissed by Commissioner, Munger Division,
Munger by order dated 30.11.2018 (Annexure-5).
Order dated 06.11.2015 passed by the Sub-Divisional
Officer cancelling the fair price shop licence of petitioner was
assailed on the ground that adequate opportunity of hearing was
not given and copy of inspection report dated 25.09.2015 of
Block Supply Officer, Lakhisarai was not provided.
Learned Single Judge has held that adequate
opportunity was given to petitioner by twice issuing show cause
notice dated 14.10.2015 and 26.10.2015 and he has also
submitted his reply dated 29.10.2015 to the show cause but
could not give satisfactory explanation and also failed to
produce last six months register and cash memo.
Appellant/petitioner failed to produce registers and even
the registers which were produce did not contain details of
beneficiaries to whom supplies were made. Petitioner neither
maintained register nor issued cash memos and same was in
violation of terms and conditions of the license as well as
directions issued by the Apex Court.
Learned Single Judge has further held that petitioner
did not raise the issue of non-supply of inspection report either
Patna High Court L.P.A No.278 of 2019 dt.30-01-2021
before the licensing authority or the appellate authority or the
revisional authority and has further found that he was fully
aware with respect to irregularities found during inspection and
violation of terms and conditions of licence committed by him
and he failed to produce relevant documents before the licensing
authority in order to deny such allegations.
Several irregularities were noted by the licensing
authority in the stock registers of PHH Scheme and Antyoday
Scheme and distribution was not made to beneficiaries. The
licensing authority found various acts of omission and
commission committed by petitioner which were apparent from
the scrutiny of stock registers maintained by the petitioner for
which no satisfactory explanation was provided by the
petitioner.
It has been further brought to the notice of this Court
by the counsel for the State that previous control orders have
been replaced by Bihar Targeted PDS (Control) Order 2016. The
Public Distribution Shop System caters need of BPL families
and other weaker sections of society, who need subsidized food
articles and denial of rations/kerosene to beneficiaries would
defeat the very object of food security scheme.
The counsel for the appellant/petitioner has relied
Patna High Court L.P.A No.278 of 2019 dt.30-01-2021
upon judgment and order as contained in Annexure-6 series but
said judgments are not applicable in facts and circumstances of
the present case.
This Court does not find any prejudice to have been
caused to appellant/petitioner in any manner as he was fully
aware about the nature of allegations and irregularities found
against him. Licensing authority has not recorded his finding on
the basis of inspection report but has arrived at his own finding
after conducting inquiry in which sufficient opportunity was
given to petitioner to controvert those allegations which he fail
to do.
This Court does not find any infirmity or error in the
order passed by the learned Single Judge, accordingly, present
L.P.A. is dismissed.
(Sanjay Karol, CJ)
( S. Kumar, J)
Veena/.-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 04.02.2021
Transmission Date NA
