Facts
The petitioner, Rajeshwar Paswan, was granted P.D.S. License No. E-01/2011 after the license of the original dealer, Reena Kumari, was cancelled due to a criminal case against her husband
Source reference: p. 3Reena Kumari challenged her cancellation in CWJC No. 13504 of 2010, where a Co-ordinate Bench set aside the cancellation, holding that vicarious liability does not apply in criminal law
Source reference: p. 3-4This decision was upheld in L.P.A. No. 819 of 2017
Source reference: p. 4Consequently, the petitioner’s license was cancelled on 24.01.2019 to restore Reena Kumari
Source reference: p. 1-2Subsequently, Reena Kumari’s license was cancelled again due to fresh material irregularities found in her P.D.S. shop
Source reference: p. 4-5The petitioner filed this writ seeking restoration of his license or consideration for grant of a license against the now-existing vacancy
Source reference: p. 2Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to the restoration of his P.D.S. license or consideration for a fresh appointment following the subsequent cancellation of the rival claimant’s license
Source reference: p. 2 / para. 2-3Law Applied
The court applied principles of administrative fairness and the doctrine of vicarious liability in criminal law as previously established in CWJC No. 13504 of 2010
Source reference: p. 3It further acted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the statutory authority, specifically the District Level Selection Committee, to exercise its discretionary power to consider representations regarding P.D.S. dealership vacancies
Source reference: p. 4-5Reasoning
The Court noted that the initial cancellation of the petitioner’s license was not due to any adverse material or misconduct on his part, but was a direct legal consequence of the High Court’s order to restore the previous dealer, Reena Kumari
Source reference: p. 2However, a change in circumstances occurred during the pendency of this writ: Reena Kumari was removed for fresh irregularities, leaving the P.D.S. dealership vacant
Source reference: p. 5Since the petitioner was previously found eligible and had operated the shop without interruption until the legal restoration of the rival, and given that no new dealer has been appointed yet, the Court found it equitable to allow the petitioner to approach the selection committee for reconsideration
Source reference: p. 4-5Holding
The Court did not quash the original cancellation order but directed the petitioner to submit a formal representation to the District Level Selection Committee within one month
The Committee is directed to pass an appropriate order on the said representation on its own merits within three months of filing
Source reference: p. 5The writ petition and interlocutory applications were disposed of with these directions
Source reference: p. 5Original Court PDF
Rajeshwar PaswanvsThe State of Bihar
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in