M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) IN this writ application the petitioners have challenged the decision, which was communicated fide letter dated 8.8.2000 and 9.8.2000 issued under the signature of respondent No. 4, Subdivisional Officer, Porhat, Chakradharpur, whereby and whereunder the petitioners licences under the Public Distribution System have been cancelled.
(2.) THE petitioners were granted licences under unemployed graduate scheme in respect of fair price shop under Public Distribution System being licence Nos. 3/98, 5/ 98 and 7/98. The respondents stopped supply of food grains to the petitioners and suspended the licence on the ground, inter alia, that licence can be issued only to the members of scheduled caste and scheduled tribe. The petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 challenged the decision of the respondents by filing CWJC No. 2051/99(R). The writ application was allowed on 6.10.1999 and the order suspending licence was quashed. The relevant portion of the order reads as under: - - "Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that once licence was issued in favour of the petitioners then it could not have been terminated/cancelled or suspended without giving notice or opportunity of hearing. Since the respondents violated the principle of natural justice, the impugned orders cannot be sustained in law. For the reason aforesaid, this writ application is allowed and the impugned orders as contained in Annexure 2 series to the writ application are quashed. However, this order will not debar the respondents from taking action against the petitioners for cancellation of licence in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing." It appears that pursuant to the aforesaid order the licences of the petitioners were restored but subsequently the respondent No. 4 took the same decision and cancelled the licence of the petitioners. I would like to quote the relevant portion of the order passed by the Subdivisional Officer, which reads as under: - - "However, at no point is it denied by them that they are not members of the SC/ST community, which communities alone are entitled to be issued a licence under the Public Distribution System vide letter No. 3874/Aa dated 9.12.1997 of the Good and Civil Supplies Department, Bihar, Patna. They also do not deny that they have been issued licences after the concerned letter was issued. Therefore, in the interest of social justice and in accordance with the principle of social equity sought to be implemented by the said letter, I order the cancellation of the licence of Madhusudan Mahto granted wrongly to him in contravention of the instructions of the Government. I am further satisfied that the principle of natural justice have been adhered to in this proceeding."
(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No. 4, Sub -divisional Officer, it is stated that he has acted in accordance with law and under the legal obligation to abide by the direction of the Government. The cancellation of licences of the petitioner is in accordance with the guidelines of the Government and well within his jurisdiction being the licensing authority. It is further stated that the petitioners were granted licence by mistake, overlooking the direction of the Government. A copy of the letter No. 2236 dated 16.5.2000, issued under the signature of Deputy Secretary to the Government, Food Supply and Commerce Department, Bihar, Patna, has been annexed as Annexure -A to the counter affidavit.;