Acquittal in criminal proceedings warrants fresh consideration of representation for restoration of franchise work and release of bank guarantees.

The petitioner was granted a franchise for electrical work by the North Bihar Power Distribution Company via an agreement dated 17.05.2008

This franchise was subsequently terminated/discarded following the institution of a criminal case against the petitioner

On 11.03.2014, the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Biraul, acquitted the petitioner of all charges in G.R. Case No. 15 of 2010

The petitioner sought the restoration of the franchise, release of the bank guarantee, and payment of commission bills with interest

He filed a representation before the Managing Director, but later approached the High Court seeking a direction for the authorities to consider a fresh representation in light of his acquittal

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction commanding the respondent authorities to consider his claim for restoration of franchise and release of financial dues following his criminal acquittal?

The court applied the principles of Administrative Law regarding the right to a fair hearing (Audi Alteram Partem) and the duty of statutory authorities to consider representations objectively when a change in circumstances occurs (such as a criminal acquittal)

The court exercised its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to ensure the respondent authorities addressed the petitioner's grievances following the removal of the original cause of termination (the criminal charges)

The Court observed that the primary reason the petitioner’s franchise was discarded was the pendency of a criminal case

Since the petitioner was officially acquitted of these charges by a court of competent jurisdiction on 11.03.2014, the factual basis for the denial of the franchise and withholding of dues had changed.

The Court reasoned that the petitioner should be permitted to submit a fresh representation to the concerned authority to reflect this acquittal.

By directing the authority to afford the petitioner an "opportunity of hearing," the Court ensured that the principles of natural justice are followed in determining the petitioner’s eligibility for restoration of work and refund of the bank guarantee

The Court ordered the respondent authority to pass an appropriate order within three months of the filing, after affording the petitioner a hearing

The writ petition and all interlocutory applications were disposed of with these directions