Patna High Court
Shrikant PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the petitioner must first avail the revision remedy under Section 32(vi) of the Control Order, 2016.
Summary
Shrikant Paswan, a PDS dealer, challenged the cancellation of his License No. 44/07 by the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Rajauli, dated 7 January 2017, and the subsequent confirmation of that cancellation by the District Collector, Nawada, dated 9 October 2019. He filed a writ petition seeking quash of both orders and restoration of the licence. The Court observed that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious statutory remedy under Section 32(vi) of the Control Order, 2016, namely filing a revision before the Divisional Commissioner. Accordingly, the Court directed the petitioner to pursue that revision within four weeks and the Divisional Commissioner to decide within a stipulated period. The writ petition was therefore disposed without reaching the merits of the licence cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a PDS dealer licence is maintainable when an alternative remedy under Section 32(vi) of the Control Order, 2016 is available.
- Whether the cancellation order of the SDO and its confirmation by the Collector can be quashed by a writ.
Legislation cited
- Control Order, 2016 — s. 32(vi)
Subjects
- PDS dealer licence
- cancellation
- writ petition
- Control Order 2016
- Section 32(vi)
- revision
- administrative law
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12596 of 2025
======================================================
Shrikant Paswan Son of Late Jageshwar Paswan, Resident of Village- Roopo,
P.S.- Roh, District- Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Nawada at Nawada.
2. The District Collector, Nawada at Nawada.
3. The District Supply Officer, Nawada at Nawada.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Rajauli, District- Nawada.
5. The Block Supply Officer, Roh, At Roh, District- Nawada.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. MNH Khan, Standing Counsel (1)
: Mrs. Babita Kumari, AC to SC1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief(s):-
“(I) For the issuance of an appropriate
Writ to quash the Order dated 7.1.2017 passed by
the SDO, Rajauli (Respondent No. 4) whereby and
whereunder the License No. 44/07 issued to the
petitioner under P.D.S. dealer has been cancelled.
(ii) For the issuance of an appropriate
Writ to quash the Order dated 9.10.2019 by the
Collector, Nawada (Respondent No. 2) whereby and
whereunder the Appeal PDS License Appeal No.
499(M) 2018 has been dismissed and the Order of
SDO (Respondent No. 4) dated 7.1.2017 has been
confirmed (Contained in Annexure-4)
(iii) For the issuance of an appropriate
Writ/ Direction to the Respondents to restore the
PDS dealer License No. 44/07 issued to the
petitioner.
(iv) For the issuance of an appropriate
Writ/Order/ Direction as your Lordships may deem
Patna High Court CWJC No.12596 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/2
fit and proper for the ends of Justice.”
3. Without going into the merits or demerits of the
case, having regard to the fact that the petitioner is having an
alternative and efficacious remedy of filing a revision under
Section 32(vi) of the Control Order 2016. The petitioner is
directed to approach the Divisional Commissioner ventilating
his grievance within a period of four weeks from the date of the
receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the revision, the
Divisional Commissioner shall pass necessary orders strictly in
accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereof. It is
needless to mention that before any order is passed, all the
parties shall be put on notice and given an opportunity of
hearing and submit their objections. The entire exercise shall be
completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a
period of eight weeks thereof. Any order passed shall be
communicated to all the parties.
4. With the above said directions, the writ petition
stand disposed of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy, J)
Ayush/-
U
Checking your session…