NARENDRA NATH TIWARI, J. - (1.) IN this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for quashing the orders passed by the licensing authority -cum -S.D.O, Godda by his Memo Nos. 307. 308, 309. 311, 312, 313, 314, 315. 316 and 317 whereby the said respondent by one stroke of pen has cancelled the licences of the petitioners granted to them for sale of kerosene oil.
(2.) THE petitioners had challenged the said cancellation order in W.P.(C) No. 3804/2006 and W.P.(C) No. 3807/2006. In view of the alternative remedy, this Court by order dated 7.9.2006 had directed the respondents to prefer revision before the Commissioner as the said orders of cancellation was passed on the direction of the Deputy Commissioner. The petitioner, thereafter, filed revision before the Commissioner and by order dated 26.3.2007 (Anne -xure -15), the Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka dismissed the petitioners' revision. The petitioners have also sought for quashing the said order dated 26.3.2007 (Annexure -15). It has been stated that the petitioners were granted licence for distribution of kerosene oil as hawkers. The petitioners were doing their business as such and distributing kerosene oil at Godda town area which was the place of business mentioned in their licences. The petitioners were suddenly issued show cause notices by Memo No. 82 dated 17.2.2006. The show cause was composite and addressed in the name of eleven licensed. It was alleged that on 7.2.2006 they were asked to go to Godda Hat for distribution of kerosene oil. The Supply Inspector proceeded to Godda Hat and waited there till 3.15 p.m., but the said vendors did not reach there. It appeared to the Supply Inspector that the petitioners were not willing to go to the Hat and distribute the kerosene oil among the general consumers so that they can illegally sell the kerosene oil in black market. On that basis, it was alleged that the petitioners have committed serious irregularity. They were asked as to why their licences be not cancelled for the said violation and Irregularity.
(3.) THE petitioners were given three days' time for filing their reply. The petitioners submitted their reply within time denying the said allegation. It was stated that the vendors had started for the Hat, but on the way they were forcibly stopped by thousands of persons, due to which they could not reach Godda Hat till 3.30 p.m., to sell the kerosene oil according to the direction of the Supply Inspector. There was no fault or irregularity on their part and they are not liable for any action.;