SITA OIL AND FLOUR MILLS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was hold-ins a wholesale foodgrain dealers' licence granted by the District Magistrate, Monghyr, under the Bihar Foodgrains Licensing Order, 1967 hereinafter called the Licensing Order. A notice dated the 20th of August, 1968, a copy of which is Annexure 1 to the writ application, was issued to the petitioner by the District Supply Officer, Monghyr to show cause why its wholesale dealers' licence should not be cancelled for its failure to submit the fortnightly returns for the fortnights ending on 15th April, 15th May and 15th June, 1968. The petitioner filed its show cause petition dated 2-9-1968 before the District Supply Officer, Monghyr, a copy of which is Annexure 2 to the writ application. In this show cause petition it took the stand that it had sent the quarterly returns in question through post under postal certificates. The District Supply Officer gave hearing to a representative of the petitioner on 25-3-1969, as stated in his communication dated 4-6-1969 (Annexure 3). Thereafter, in the said communication, he informed the petitioner that from the statement of its representative it appeared that it was not dealing in foodgrain, at one time it did not store more than 100 quintals of foodgrains, it was dealing only in manufacture of edible oil and flour and, therefore, it was not necessary that it should continue to have a wholesale foodgrain licence; its purpose could very well be served by retail foodgrain licence. The District Magistrate, therefore, the communication stated further, had been pleased to cancel the wholesale foodgrain licence No. 145/66 of the petitioner on that ground.

(2.) The petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner. Bhagalpur Division. The Commissioner by his order dated 27-10-1969 (Annexure 4) dismissed the appeal upholding the ground on which the licence had been cancelled, as stated in Annexure 3, as also stating in his order that the firm had not been submitting fortnightly returns as required under the terms of the licence and on being satisfied on that account also the licence had been cancelled. The petitioner has obtained a rule from this Court for the quashing of Annexures 3 and 4 by grant of an appropriate writ. Cause has been shown by filing a counter-affidavit on behalf of the respondents as also by the learned Government Pleader I at the time of hearing.

(3.) Three points were urged in support of the writ application by learned Counsel for the petitioner--