S. Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 29.10.2013 in License Cancellation Appeal No. 14/2013, the present writ petition has been filed. The petitioner was issued License No. 16/94 under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984. On an allegation of black -marketing, a First Information Report vide Rajrappa P.S. Case No. 100/2012 under Sec. 7 of the E.C. Act was registered on 29.12.2012. On the basis of the inspection carried on 29.12.2012 and consequent registration of the criminal case, a show -cause notice was issued to the petitioner to which the petitioner duly replied however, vide order dated 18.3.2013, the license of the petitioner was cancelled, the petitioner thereafter, preferred License Cancellation Appeal No. 14/2013 challenging the order dated 18.3.2013. The present writ petition has been filed against dismissal of the said appeal vide order dated 29.10.2013.
(2.) Mr. A.K. Sinha, the learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the license of the petitioner was cancelled on a presumption that the petitioner was involved in black -marketing of the food -grains. The appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed by a cryptic order, merely referring to the instruction contained in the letter dated 9.2.2013. It is contended that the appellate authority has not considered the specific plea taken by the petitioner and, the appellate order discloses complete non -application of mind by the appellate authority.
(3.) Raising an objection to the maintainability of the writ petition, the learned counsel for the respondent -State of Jharkhand submits that the petitioner has statutory remedy under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984. If the petitioner is aggrieved by dismissal of his appeal, he can prefer revision under Sec. 29 of the Order, 1984. It is further submitted that the license of the petitioner was earlier suspended on two occasions and in the present incident also 212 bags of rice were found stored in his house.;