M/s Shyam Bhandar vs State of Bihar and others

This petition is directed against the order passed by respondent no. 2, the Collector, East Champaran at Motihari, on 4.3.89, by which the wholesale food-grain licence of the petitioner was suspended from immediate effect. A copy of the said order has been filed as Annexure 3 to this petition. By filing a supplementary affidavit today, it is stated on behalf of the petitioner that he filed an application before respondent no. 2 on 7.6.89 to revoke the order of suspension as a period of 90 days had already elapsed since the date of the order.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that no notice to show cause was served on him. The order, as contained in Annexure-3, is obviously an interim order of suspension under clause 11(2) of the Bihar Trad Articles (Licence Unification) Order, 1984. It is further stated that in spite of the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner on 7.6.89, the Collector has not passed any order as yet.

learned counsel for the State wants some time to ascertain whether the Collector has passed any order. We are not inclined to grant time to the State as the petition is pending before this Court from 5.5.89 and the adjournment is not likely to serve any purpose in disposal of this case.

A mandatory provision has been made in clause 11 (2) of the Bihar. Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, which states that no order of cancellation shall be made under this clause unless the licensee has been given a reasonable opportunity stating his case against the proposed cancellation but during the pendency or in contemplation of proceedings of cancellation of licence, the licence can be suspended for a period not exceeding 90 days without giving any opportunity to the licensee of stating his case.

It is therefore, manifest that an interim order of suspension of a licence cannot remain effective beyond 90 days without giving any opportunity to the licensee of stating his case. It has been emphatically asserted on behalf of the petitioner that no show cause notice has been served on him and as such he has not been afforded any opportunity to place his case before the licensing authority. So, keeping in view the statutory provision and the facts asserted by the petitioner, the impugned order now cannot be allowed to stand. So, this petition is allowed at the stage of admission itself and the order, as contained in Annexure 3 is hereby quashed.