SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Pat) 1613

NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH
Abdul Rauf @ Sri Md. Abdul Rauf – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

1. The petitioners are retail licensee under the provisions of the Bihar Trade Articles Licenses Unification Order, 1984 framed and issued under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The Licensing Authority under the aforesaid Order is the Sub-Divisional Officer. Petitioners as a retail dealer are also functioning as a dealer under the public distribution system.

It appears that an inspection was conducted at the petitioners premises and certain irregularities were found. Ultimately, the licenses of the petitioners have been cancelled and the order of cancellation is Annexure-6, under the signature of the Licensing Authority, who is the Sub-Divisional Officer, Araria.

2. At the first instance, this Court felt that it was the matter that the petitioners who ought to have been adjudicated in appeal, an appeal lay from such an order. But, Mr. N.K. Agarwal, learned Senior Counsel appearing in support of the writ petitions drew my attention to a complete order sheet of the case, which is contained in Annexure-5. Now, perused the order sheet.

I am afraid, it depicts a very sorry state of affairs, it is too fate in the day to urge that the power being exercised by





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top