AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.
Petitioner challenges the order bearing Memo No. 892 dated 30.08.2016 (Annexure-4) issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar Chapra
(Respondent No. 3) cancelling the licence of the petitioner bearing No. 86/2007 on the ground that the licence was not renewed within time and even
late renewal was not sought with late fee, as provided under the provisions of PDS Control Orders.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the PDS licence was not given to an individual but to a Cooperative Society/PACS and due to laches
on the part of the earlier Managing Committee the said licence fee was not deposited within time nor renewed with late fee. The present Chairman
has only joined the PACS in March, 2015 and has already deposited the late fee along with the renewal application, as such, prayed that the PDS
licence be directed to continue.
Learned counsel for the State, however, submits that the licence of the petitioner was effective till 31st of December, 2012 and fee for renewal of
licence was deposited after a long delay of about four years as also the PDS shop was running without licence.
The issue at hand is no longer res integra, as it has been decided by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 11278 of 2016 vide order dated 28.01.2017 that if
licence to the Cooperative Society/ PACS is not renewed then the beneficiaries attached to the concerned village would suffer at large and on ex
debito justitiae, allowed the petitioner to be considered for renewal of licence accepting the late fee.
Since the petitioner has already deposited renewal application with late fee, the order bearing Memo No. 892 dated 30.08.2016 (Annexure-4) is
quashed. Let the licence of the concerned PACS be renewed and supplies be restored. However, this order would not be treated as a precedence.
The writ application is allowed.