Gonaur Baitha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16659 of 2018 ====================================================== Gonaur Baitha Son of Bathu Baitha, resident of Village- Sisaula Kalan, Panchyat- Sisaula, P.S.- Suppi, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner.

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi. 3.

The District Supply Officer, Sitamarhi.

4.

The Sub Divisional Officer Cum Licensing Authority Sitamarhi Sadar, District-Sitamarhi.

5.

The Block Supply Officer, Block- Suppi, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Respondents.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Anil Chandra, Adv.

Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondents :

Mr.S.Raza Ahmad - AAG5.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 21-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Collector dated 31.07.2018 passed in Supply Appeal No. 30/18. The order dated 31.07.2018 is quoted below:

U;k;ky; lekgÙkkZ] lhrke<+hA vkiwfrZ vihy okn la0 30@18 xksukSj cSBk cuke fcgkj ljdkj vkns k "

31-7-18 bl okn dh dk;Zokgh vkosnd xksukSj cSBk] tu forj.k iz.kkyh foØsrk iapk;r llkSyk Fkkuk & lqIih ftyk & lhrke<+h ds }kjk vuqe.My inkf/kdkjh] lhrke<+h lnj ds ikfjr vkns"k Kkikad 01 eq[; fnukad 25-04-18 ds fo:} vihy nk;j fd;k x;k gS] ftlij

2/4 lquokbZ ds i"pkr okn dks lafLFkr djrs gq;s ewy vfHkys[k dh ekax vuqe.My inkf/kdkjh] lhrke<+h lnj ls bl dk;kZy; ds i=kad 1804 fnukad 12-06-18 }kjk dh x;hA vuqe.My inkf/kdkjh] lhrke<+h lnj ls ewy vfHkys[k izkIr gqvk ,oa ljdkj dh vksj ls fo"ks'k yksd vfHk;kstd ds }kjk tckc nkf[ky fd;k x;k] ftlij vihydrkZ ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ,oa fo"ks'k yksd vfHk;kstd dks lqukA vihydÙkkZ ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk dguk gS fd fnukad 29-08-17 dks llkSyk vkjk ehy ds ikl eq[; iFk ij lkbZfdy ij nks cksjk pkoy lqIih vks0ih0 ds } kjk idM+k x;k FkkA ftlesa lkbZfdy lckj }kjk lkbZfdy fxjkdj ;g dgrs gq;s Hkkxk fd pkoy vihydÙkkZ ds }kjk dkykcktkjh esa cspk x;k gSA ftlds vk/kkj ij vihydÙkkZ ds fo:} estjxat Fkkuk dk.M la0 391@17 ntZ fd;k x;kA mDr dk.M esa vuqla/kkudÙkkZ ds }kjk vafre izfrosnu lk{; dh deh ds dkj.

k lefiZr djrs gq;s vuqla/kku dks cUn dj fn;k x;k gSA bl laca/k esa vuqe.My inkf/kdkjh] lhrke<+h lnj ds }kjk vapy vf/kdkjh&lg&iz[k.M vkiwfrZ inkf/kdkjh] lqIih ls tkap izfrosnu dh ekax dh x;h Fkh] ftlesa muds }kjk vius i=kad 87 fnukad 23-10-17 }kjk izfrosfnr fd;k x;k gS fd miHkksDrkvksa ds }kjk foØsrk ds dk;Z ls larq'V gSA mijksDr fLFkfr esa xkao dh jktfurh ds rgr lkbZfdy lckj }kjk xyr <ax ls Q¡lkus gsrq vihydÙkkZ dk uke cksydj Qjkj gks tkuk bl ckr dh iqf'V djrk gSA vr% vuqe.My inkf/kdkjh] lhrke<+h lnj }kjk ikfjr vkns"k dks fujLr djus gsrq vuqjks/k fd;k x;k gSA fo"ks'k yksd vfHk;kstd] lhrke<h dk dguk gS fd iqfyl vuqla/kku esa foØsrk ds fo:} dksbZ vkjksi ugha ikrs gq;s lk{; ds deh ds dkj.k vafre izfrosnu lefiZr djrs gq;s vuqla/kku dks cUn dj fn;k x;k gSA vuqe.

My inkf/kdkjh] lhrke<+h lnj }kjk tks tkap djk;k x;k FkkA mDr tkap izfrosnu foØsrk ds fo:} dksbZ Bksl vkjksi izekf.kr ugha gqvk gSA bl izdkj mHk; i{kksa ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dks lquus ,oa vfHkys[k ds voyksdu ls Li'V gksrk gS fd foØsrk ds fo:} vko";d oLrq vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr estjxat Fkkuk dk.M la0 391@17 ntZ gS rFkk mDr vkjksi ls U;k;ky; }kjk mUgsa nks'k eqDr ugha fd;k x;k gSA vr,o vuqe.

3/4 ikfjr vkns"k esa dksbZ =qfV ugha gSA vr% muds }kjk ikfjr vkns"k dks ;Fkkor j[krs gq;s vihydÙkkZ ds vihy vkosnu dks [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA ys[kkfir ,oa la"kksf/krA lekgÙkkZ lekgÙkkZ lhrke<+h lhrke<+h From perusal of the order of the appellate authority, the court finds that without application of mind, the appellate authority has passed the order. In his discussion, he has noted that the Supply Officer in his report dated 23.10.2017 has stated that he is satisfied with the work of the petitioner as PDS Dealer. He also noted the circumstance which indicate that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He also noted the fact that during investigation, the police did not find any material against the petitioner and submitted the final form against him, however, the Collector has dismissed the appeal.

Such consideration and decision totally lacks objectivity and application of mind and as such the order can not be sustained. Accordingly, the impugned order is quashed. However, quashing of the impugned order will not come in the way of the respondents, if any material surfaced to connect the petitioner with the offence of black marketing, the respondents shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law.

4/4 Otherwise, the petitioner would be entitled to restoration of his PDS licence.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) ravishankar/- U