Clerical errors in official records should not lead to severe penalties, especially when no harm is caused to any party.

JUDGMENT :

Mohit Kumar Shah, J.

1. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.04.2023, passed by the Ld. Court of Collector, West Champaran at Bettiah, i.e. the respondent no.3, in Misc. Case No. R.M.-69/2009-10 (Md.Sahabuddin vs. Tara Singh @ Tarachand Singh), whereby and whereunder the stamp vendor license of the petitioner, bearing License No.01/1996-97 has been cancelled.

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner are that the petitioner was possessing a stamp vendor license bearing License No. 01/1996-97, however, the same was suspended by the respondent no.3 by an order dated 19.11.2013, passed in connection with Misc. Case No. R.M.-69/2009-10, filed by one Md. Sahabuddin, which was challenged by the petitioner by filing a writ petition before this Court, bearing C.W.J.C. No.5353 of 2019. The said writ petition was disposed of by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 27.03.2019, directing the respondent no.3 to pass the final order, in the aforesaid Misc. Case No. R.M.-69/2009-10, within a period of five months of receipt/production of a copy of the said order.

3. The respondent no.3 had failed to pass the final order in connection with the aforesaid Misc. Case No. R.M.-69/2009-10, within the stipulated period of five months, leading to the petitioner filing a contempt petition, whereafter, the impugned order dated 24.04.2023 has been passed by the respondent no. 3, cancelling the stamp vendor license of the petitioner.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the private respondent no.6 i.e. Md. Sahabuddin @ Md. Sahabuddin Kuraishi had filed a complaint before the respondent no.3, inter-alia alleging therein that the petitioner has committed forgery while selling stamps, as a licensed stamp vendor. The respondent no.3 had then taken cognizance of the said complaint and instituted a case bearing Misc. Case No. R.M.-69/2009-10, whereafter he had directed the Officer In- charge, District Legal Section, West Champaran at Bettiah, to conduct an inquiry. Thereafter, the Officer In-charge, District Legal Section, West Champaran at Bettiah, had conducted an Inquiry and submitted a report dated 29.09.2011, wherein it has been stated that the aforesaid Md. Sahabuddin @ Md. Sahabuddin Kuraishi has submitted photocopies of two agreements, out of which first agreement has been written by Walter Joseph Osta, on which the petitioner has made his signature as a witness on 01.06.1998 and on the back of the same, the serial number of the Stamp is mentioned as Sr. No.452 dated 12.06.1997 or 1998, the date of purchase of the stamp being not very clear, while the second agreement is dated 31.12.1998 and on the back of the same, the serial number of the Stamp is mentioned as Sr. No. 1274 dated 28.12.1998. It is further stated in the said report that from a perusal of the original Stamp Sale Register of the petitioner, it transpires that on 12.06.1998, Stamp bearing Sr. No.452 has not been sold, however, if the relevant entries of the date of 12.06.1997 is seen, the same depicts sale of Stamp bearing Sr. No.452, in favor of George Baptist. As far as the other stamp, bearing Sr. No. 1274 dated 28.12.1998, is concerned, the same has been shown to have been issued to one Ram Naresh Singh, while stamp bearing Sr. No. 1275 dated 28.12.1998, has been shown to have been issued in the name of George Baptist.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that two allegations have been levelled against the petitioner by the complainant, which are as follows:-

(i) Stamp bearing Sr. No.452 dated 12.06.1998, which is stated to have been issued by the petitioner, has actually not been sold on 12.06.1998, as per the Stamp Sale Register.

(ii) The second Stamp bearing Sr. No.1274 dated 28.12.1998 is stated to have been sold by the petitioner but in the Stamp Sale Register, against Sr. No.1271 to 1274, it has been recorded that stamps were sold to one Ram Naresh Singh.

6. Th