Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Smt. Putul Devi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.

Smt. Putul Devi vs State of Jharkhand and ors.

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Jharkhand Decided Jan 17, 2006
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/514799

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP(C) No. 4880 of 2005
Subject
Commercial
Disposition
Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988[C.A.No.59/1988] Section 166; [A.K. Patnaik, CJ, A.K. Gohil & S. Samvatsar, JJ] Application for compensation for personal injury Death of injured claimant subsequently for some other reasons Held, Claim for personal injury will abate on the death of claimant. Claim will not survive to ...

Key legal issue
Commercial
Outcome / disposition
Petition dismissed
Acts & sections
Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1994

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Smt. Putul Devi

Advocate Niranjan Singh, Adv.

Respondent

State of Jharkhand and ors.

Advocate H.K. Singh, S.C. 1

Legal References

Acts
Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1994
Cases Referred
Ramautar Sinha v. State of Bihar
Reported In
AIR2006Jhar45; [2006(1)JCR361(Jhr)]

Excerpt

- motor vehicles act, 1988[c.a.no.59/1988] section 166; [a.k. patnaik, cj, a.k. gohil & s. samvatsar, jj] application for compensation for personal injury death of injured claimant subsequently for some other reasons held, claim for personal injury will abate on the death of claimant. claim will not survive to his legal representative except as regards claim for pecuniary loss to estate of claimant. - the state of bihar, reported 'in 2000 (3) pljr 321, the sub-divisional officer cancelled the license on the orders of the appellate authority, which was held to be bad. state of bihar, reported in 2000 (4) pljr 185, the order issued for cancellation of license by the appellate authority directly, was held to be bad.orderr.k. merathia, j.1. heard the parties.2. petitioner claiming to be a fair price shop holder and also a retail licensee under the bihar trade articles (licenses unification) order, 1994 (the act for short), prays for quashing the order dated 16.6.2005 (annexure-2), issued by the food, supply and commerce department, government of jharkhand, ranchi.3. from the said order, it appears that while taking steps for effective working of the public distribution system in the state, the department found that so far as the fair price shops are concerned, several illegalities and irregularities were being committed by the concerned government officers in the matter of grant, renewal, revocation of suspension and cancellation of licenses and therefore, a committee has been constituted to review all such cases. the committee will also consider the recommendations for new licenses and forward the same to the department for approval.. the committee will also deal with the recommendations received on the complaints against the licensees of fair price shops in the matters of suspensions of license or it's revocation.4. it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that only the licensing authorities, prescribed by the act, are empowered to deal with all the matters relating to the licenses and the aggrieved person can file appeal/revision against the orders of the licensing authority before the superior authority. it is argued that if the licensing authorities are not acting properly, action can be taken against them and also against the beneficiaries of the orders passed by them. it is further submitted that such powers of the licensing authority cannot be usurped by a committee headed by the deputy commissioner, who is the appellate authority, against the orders passed by the licensing authority of the retail dealers. thus it is submitted that without amending the law, the powers of the licensing authority cannot be vested in the committee or the department.5. the cases relied.....

Full Judgment

ORDER

R.K. Merathia, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. Petitioner claiming to be a fair price shop holder and also a retail licensee under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1994 (the Act for short), prays for quashing the order dated 16.6.2005 (Annexure-2), issued by the Food, Supply and Commerce Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

3. From the said order, it appears that while taking steps for effective working of the Public Distribution System in the State, the department found that so far as the Fair Price Shops are concerned, several illegalities and irregularities were being committed by the concerned Government officers in the matter of grant, renewal, revocation of suspension and cancellation of licenses and therefore, a committee has been constituted to review all such cases. The Committee will also consider the recommendations for new licenses and forward the same to the department for approval.. The Committee will also deal with the recommendations received on the complaints against the licensees of fair price shops in the matters of suspensions of license or it's revocation.

4. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that only the Licensing Authorities, prescribed by the Act, are empowered to deal with all the matters relating to the licenses and the aggrieved person can file appeal/revision against the orders of the Licensing Authority before the superior authority. It is argued that if the Licensing Authorities are not acting properly, action can be taken against them and also against the beneficiaries of the orders passed by them. It is further submitted that such powers of the Licensing Authority cannot be usurped by a Committee headed by the Deputy Commissioner, who is the appellate authority, against the orders passed by the licensing authority of the retail dealers. Thus it is submitted that without amending the Law, the powers of the licensing authority cannot be vested in the Committee or the department.

5. The cases relied on by learned Counsel for the petitioner are of no help to him. In the Full Bench decision of Patna High Court in the case of Parwati Bhandar v. The State of Bihar reported in 1991 (2) PLJR 774, it was held that the Collector, who is the Licensing Authority for the wholesale dealer could not, delegate his power to Special Officer, Rationing, as he has not been so appointed by the State Government. In that situation, the license granted by the Special Officer, Rationing and the notice issued by him suspending the wholesale license, both were held to be illegal. In the case of Baiju Prasad v. The State of Bihar, reported 'in 2000 (3) PLJR 321, the Sub-divisional Officer cancelled the license on the orders of the appellate authority, which was held to be bad. Similarly in the case of Ramautar Sinha v. State of Bihar, reported in 2000 (4) PLJR 185, the order issued for cancellation of license by the Appellate Authority directly, was held to be bad.

6. In my opinion, the impugned order has been issued in public interest. District Level Committees, headed by the Deputy Commissioner, have been constituted for achieving the object of distribution of the essential commodities at fair prices by the fair price shop dealer. The Deputy Commissioner is the Licensing Authority for the wholesale dealers. The licensing authorities for the retail dealers and other officers of the Supply departments are members of the committee.

So far as a Fair Price Shop is concerned, it stands on different footing. It is run on the basis of an agreement/grant by the Government. Since such fair shop dealer also deals in essential commodities, a license is required under the Act. The provisions of the Act cannot be interpreted to mean that the concerned Government Department is debarred from constituting such committee for achieving the object sought to be achieved under Public Distribution System. Such decision cannot be said to be arbitrary or mala fide or unconstitutional.

7. For the reasons aforesaid, I do not find any merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed. However, no costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial