"Justice Delayed, Relief Denied: An 18-Year Wait for a License"

 

Introduction

In the High Court of Judicature at Patna, a case was brought forward by Abdul Hamid against the State of Bihar and several of its officials. The case, registered as Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8108 of 2017, centered on the cancellation of Mr. Hamid's license and his subsequent pursuit of its restoration.

Background

Mr. Hamid's license was canceled along with several others. In a similar case, the Patna High Court directed the licensing authority to reconsider the matter, which led to the restoration of those licenses. However, Mr. Hamid did not initially join the other petitioners in bringing the case to the High Court. Consequently, his license remained canceled. He then appealed to the District Magistrate, but no decision was made.

Petitioner's Argument

Mr. Hamid argued that since other individuals in similar situations had their licenses restored, he should receive the same benefit. His lawyer, Mr. Mishra, contended that if a benefit is granted to some in a particular category, it should be extended to all within that category. He also suggested that delays in bringing writ petitions before the court should be overlooked, especially when an individual's rights are at stake.

Court's Decision

The court rejected these arguments, citing the significant delay of 18 years in bringing the matter to the attention of the authorities or the court. The court also noted that Mr. Hamid’s license was under an earlier Control Order and would not automatically extend under the new Control Order of 2016.

The court stated that while Mr. Hamid might have received relief if he had acted promptly, the extensive delay and changes in regulations made it difficult to grant his petition.

Additional Points

Mr. Mishra pointed out that Mr. Hamid had submitted a representation to the licensing authority in 2012, following the High Court’s order to reconsider the licenses. However, this representation was not addressed. The court acknowledged this but emphasized that Mr. Hamid should have followed up on his application or approached the court sooner.

The court also highlighted that Mr. Hamid's initial appeal was abandoned and the current petition was filed in 2017, further contributing to the issue of delay.

Concluding Remarks

The Patna High Court concluded that the delay in pursuing legal remedies and the changes in licensing regulations made it inappropriate to grant Mr. Hamid's request. The court did, however, suggest that Mr. Hamid could approach the departmental Secretary to discuss the possibility of applying for a license again if the position were to be advertised. The court also clarified that the previous cancellation of his license should not be a disadvantage if he chooses to apply for a new license in the future.

In summary, the court's decision underscores the importance of timely action in legal matters and the challenges faced when there are significant delays in seeking remedies.

Read the full judgement Below;

https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTUjODEwOCMyMDE3IzEjTg==-z4YZNAPSZTk=