Meera Devi vs State Of Jharkhand

N.N. Tiwari, J

[1] The petitioners, in this batch of writ petitions, have assailed the order of the Respondent No. 3 dated 12th June, 2010, whereby their respective licences of public distribution system have been cancelled by a common printed order without application of mind by the licensing authority.

[2] It has been stated that the licences of public distribution system were given to the petitioners by the competent authority and they have not violated any terms of the licences or any statutory order and the order of cancellation of their licences is wholly arbitrary and unwarranted. It has been submitted that a common show cause notice was issued to the petitioners and they had submitted their replies, but even the replies have not been discussed and considered by the licensing authority and the impugned orders have been passed, cancelling their licences arbitrarily without assigning any speaking reason.

[3] Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, on the other hand, opposed the writ petitions and submitted that the licences of public distribution system were issued to the petitioners in violation of the prescribed circular and the guidelines issued by the Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies, Government of Jharkhand. The licences were granted in excess than the permissible limit. The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum- Additional Collector, Palamau had found that the licences were granted in contravention of the laws and the guidelines issued by the department and on that basis notices were issued to the licence holders to explain and produce the document(s) in support of their licences. However, the licence holders failed to file satisfactory explanation and not produce cogent evidence in support of validity of their licences, The case, being similar, common order has been passed by the licensing authority, cancelling the licences of the petitioners.

[4] Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that the petitioner's licences have been cancelled by a common printed order without discussing the show cause replies filed by the petitioners. The printed order has some blank columns, which have been filled in by hand, giving names, number of licence, memo number, date etc. There is no discussion and consideration of the replies of the petitioners as also there is no application of mind of the licensing authority in individual cases of the petitioners.

[5] it is well settled that once the licence is granted to a person, he acquires valuable right. Such right cannot be infringed upon or taken away in a casual manner, as has been done in the instant case.

[6] For the reasons aforesaid. The impugned orders of the licensing authority dated 12th June, 2010 are hereby quashed. These writ petitions are allowed.

[7] It is made clear that this order does not impede the licensing authority from proceeding and passing order in accordance with law.