DHIRENDRA NATH BARIK Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

LAWS(JHAR)-2010-11-40

HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND

Decided on November 25,2010

Dhirendra Nath Barik Appellant

VERSUS

STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Heard the parties.
(2.) WPC No. 3737 of 2009 The Sub Divisional Officer, Saraikella issued notices to several Public Distribution System (PDS) Shop Dealers Including the Petitioners to show cause regarding misuse of food grains supplied to them under Jawahar Rojgar Yojona and for violating the terms of the licenses as well as the agreements of PDS Shops. After giving opportunity to them, the Sub Divisional Officer cancelled their licenses holding that there has been violation of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licensing Unification & Control) Order, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as Unification Order) and also the terms of the agreement for running P.D.S. Shops. Against the said orders passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Petitioner No. 8-Bhagirath Panda preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner. By order dated 8.11.2001, the Deputy Commissioner rejected the said appeal on merit. After about 4 years, other Petitioners preferred miscellaneous petitions before the Deputy Commissioner. The successor-Deputy Commissioner reversed the order passed by the predecessor Deputy Commissioner mainly on the ground that the dealers were granted bail in the criminal cases and the licenses were restored One Sant Kumar Sahu preferred a writ petition being WPC No. 7816 of 2006 for restoration of his license. In compliance order passed in the said writ petition, the Deputy Commissioner initiated a proceeding. The grievance of the writ Petitioners is that without any notice to them and in their absence, the impugned order dated 30.8.2010 has been passed cancelling the licenses of several dealers including the petitioners.
(3.) W.P.C. No. 3237 of 2010 The licenses of these writ Petitioners were also cancelled by tie Sub Divisional Officer along with other dealers, as aforesaid. After the licenses of other licensees were restored, as aforesaid, the writ Petitioners also filed miscellaneous petition before the Deputy Commissioner for passing similar orders. The Deputy Commissioner rejected the said miscellaneous petition. Against which, the Petitioners filed writ petition being WPC No. 3857 of 2007, which was disposed of on 3.12.2008 remitting the matter to the Deputy Commissioner to consider whether there has been discrimination between the similarly situated dealers or not. Accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner passed the order dated 20.3.2009 impugned in this writ petition. The grievance of the writ Petitioners is that in terms of interim order dated 11.9.2009, passed in the aforesaid writ petition-WPC No. 3737 of 2009, the other dealers are running their PDS Shops.;

Click here to view full judgement.