SATYR BRATA SANYAL, J.

1. The petitioner is a licensee under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order,. 1984. Pursuant to the said licence, it carries on wholesale business in kerosene oil. The petitioner has moved this Court in this writ petition for quashing the order dated 24-11-1988 of the Collector, Sitamarhi (respondent No. 2) as contained in Annexure-4, by which the petitioners licence has been suspended with immediate effect because of institution of a criminal case against it under S.7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The order of suspension of the licence was not preceded by any show cause notice and/or affording any opportunity therefor to the petitioner. The writ petition was filed on 20-2-1989 and it came up for admission on 9-3-1989 before Hon ble Mr. Justice P.S. Mishra and Hon ble Mr. Justice R.N. Sinha, who while admitting the writ petition, formulated two questions and required the aforesaid two questions to be decided by a Division Bench. The order dated 9-3-1989 reads as follows:

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. This application will be heard by Division Bench to consider whether the decisions with reference to the various Control orders, which existed prior to the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984. On the question that no order of suspension of the licence can be ordered by way of interim measure on the ground of pendency of a criminal case are still applicable and whether in view of sub-cl. (2) of Cl. 11 of the Unification Order, which makes issuance of show cause notice before cancellation of license imperative and not sub-cl. (1) for the purpose of suspension of licence on the ground of alleged contravention of the terms and conditions of licence, action be taken against the licensee for suspension of his licence without notice. There shall, however, be no interim order."

2. Prior to the promulgation of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984 , (hereinafter referred to as the "Unification Order 1984,") trade and business in kerosene oil was regulated by the Bihar Kerosene Dealers Licensing Order, 1965, an order made under S.3 of the Essential Commodities Act. By Cl. 32 of the Unification Order, 1984, some of the Control orders, as shown in Schedule III of the order stood repealed, Bihar Kerosene Dealers Licensing Order 1965, being one of them. Cl. 8 of the Bihar Kerosene Dealers Licensing Order, 1965, envisages" Cancellation of licence". In the year 1975, the said Cl.8 was slightly amended by providing that if any case under S.7 of the Essential Commodities Act is pending against a licensee, the licence of the licensee concerned shall remain suspended during the pendency of the case by order in writing of the licensing authority. By passing reference, it may be stated here that this power of suspension during the pendency of a criminal case was not contemplated by any other order made under S.3 of the Essential Commodities Act applicable to the State of Bihar which were in vague prior to the Unification Order, 1984, but some of the orders provided that the licence shall stand cancelled in the case of conviction but the same will be restored or reissued if the conviction is subsequently set aside. The amendment in Bihar Kerosene Dealers Licensing Order, 1965, was necessitated and followed when this Court struck down an order of suspension made because of pendency of a criminal case in the case of Onkarmal Satyanarain V/s. State of Bihar, reported in 1977 Pat LJR 93 : (1977 Cri LJ 39) arising out of Kerosene Dealers Licensing Order, 1965. In that case, a Bench of this Court held that pendency of a criminal case under S.7 of the Essential Commodities Act is neither contravention of any provision of the Order, nor any condition of the licence nor any directing issued under this Order.

3. Admittedly, the impugned order of suspension has been made in purported exercise of the power conferred under Cl. 11 of the Unification