Judgment K.B.Sinha, J. 1. This petition is directed against the order passed by respondent No. 2, the Collector, East Champaran at Motihari, on 4-3-1989, by which the wholesale foodgrain licence of the petitioner was suspended from immediate effect A copy of the said order has been filed as Annexure 3 to this petition. 2. By filing a supplementary affidavit today, it is stated on behalf of the petitioner that he filed an: application before respondent No. 2 on 7-6-1989 to revoke the order of suspension as a period of 90 days had 8Iready elapsed since the date of the order. 3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that no notice to show cause was served on him. The order, as contained in Annexure 3, is obviously an interim order of suspension under Clause 11 (2) of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licence Unification) Order, 1984. It is further stated that in spite of the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner on 7-6-1989, the Collector has not passed any order as yet. 4. Learned Counsel for the State wants some time to ascertain whether the Collector has passed any order. We are not inclined to grant time to the State as the petition is pending before this Court from 5- 5-1989 and the adjournment is not likely to serve any purpose in disposal of this case. 5. It is therefore, manifest that an interim order of suspension of a licence cannot remain effective beyond 90 days without giving any opportunity to the licensee of stating his case. It has been emphatically asserted on behalf of the petitioner that no show cause notice has been served on him and as such he has not been afforded any opportunity to place his case before the licensing authority. So, keeping in view the statutory provision and the facts asserted by the petitioner, the impugned order now cannot be allowed to stand. 6. So, this petition is allowed at the stage of admission itself and the order, as contained in Annexure 3 is hereby quashed.