Patna High Court
Kamleshwar PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The cancellation order is set aside as it violated natural justice, and the petition is allowed.
Summary
Petitioner Kamleshwar Paswan challenged the cancellation of his PDS license (No. 34/2016) by the Sub‑Divisional Officer, who issued a show‑cause notice on 13‑08‑2024 without attaching the enquiry report. The petitioner argued that this breach of natural justice rendered the cancellation invalid. The respondents contended that the writ petition was not maintainable because an appeal before the District Magistrate was available. Relying on Patna High Court judgment CWJC No.253 of 2014, the court held that failure to provide the enquiry report violates the principles of natural justice and that the writ petition is maintainable. Consequently, the court set aside the cancellation order and remanded the matter to the licensing authority to furnish the enquiry report and give the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
Issues considered
- Whether cancellation of a PDS license without furnishing the enquiry report with the show‑cause notice violates the principles of natural justice.
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable despite the existence of an alternative remedy of appeal before the District Magistrate.
Subjects
- natural justice
- PDS license cancellation
- show‑cause notice
- writ petition
- administrative law
- Bihar Targeted PDS Control Order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13924 of 2025
======================================================
Kamleshwar Paswan S/o Late Ram Sharan Paswan Resident of Village-
Shahpur, Govindpur, Panchayat-Gorigama, P.S.-Mahnar, District-Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secrtary, Food and Consumer Protection
Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Vaishali at Hajipur.
3. The Sub-Divisional Officer-Cum-Licensing Authority, Mahnar, District-
Vaishali.
4. The Block Supply Officer, Mahnar, District-Vaishali.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel (04)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
4 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief(s):-
1. That the present writ application is
being filed on behalf of the petitioner for
issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders,
direction/directions in the nature of certiorari
for quashing the order dated 13.08.2024
contained in Memo No. 292/Aa dated
13.08.2024 passed by the Learned Sub-
Divisional Officer Mahnar -cum-Licensing
authority, by which he was pleased to cancel the
PDS license of the petitioner being License No.
34/2016 on the basis of a notice where there is
no stipulation of proposal of cancellation of
Patna High Court CWJC No.13924 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
2/5
license in terms of Rule 27(2) of Bihar Targeted
PDS Control order 2016 and as such the order
impugned dated 13.08.2024 is fit to be set aside
by this Hon'ble court and further be pleased to
restore the license and supply of the petitioner.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has stated that the Sub-Divisional Officer while
issuing the show cause notice to the petitioner has not enclosed
the enquiry report.
4. Further learned counsel has relied on the judgment
of this Hon’ble Court in CWJC No.253 of 2014 dated
11.03.2015 wherein this Hon’ble Court has held that the
nonsupply of the enquiry report along with the show-cause is
bad and against the principle of natural justice and equity.
5. Learned counsel has stated in view of the above
mentioned provisions of law and judgment relied by the
petitioner, the impugned order may be set aside and matter
remanded back to the authorities concerned for furnishing a
copy of the enquiry report and any other material that they seek
to rely on and give an opportunity of filing his explanation and
thereafter take necessary action.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the respondents has vehemently opposed the very
Patna High Court CWJC No.13924 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
3/5
maintainability of the writ petition and stated that the present
writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has an
alternative and efficacious remedy of filing an appeal before the
District Magistrate. Learned counsel has therefore prayed this
Hon’ble Court to dismiss the present writ petition.
7. This Court in CWJC No.253 of 2014 dated
11.03.2015 held as under:
"In my opinion, irregularities in
maintenance of notice board or maintenance of
the stocks within the premises of the petitioner
are too trivial and cannot form a basis for
cancellation of licence. No doubt there were
other serious charges against the petitioner
regarding non-issuance of cash-memo to the
consumers, distribution of lesser amount of
kerosene oil and non-distribution of foodgrains
but surprisingly even while making such
allegations, the names of such consumers who
are dissatisfied by such action of the petitioner
are conspicuously missing. The allegations are
sweeping in nature without reference to any
specific consumer.
In my opinion the non-supply of the
enquiry report conducted by the District Level
Committee which is the foundation for issuance
of show cause notice placed at Annexure-1 as
well as non-supply of names of such of the
consumers who had complained against the
petitioner as regarding the irregularities in
Patna High Court CWJC No.13924 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
4/5
distribution of the food-grains or the kerosene
oil has prejudiced the petitioner to file his
purposeful reply and in absence thereof, the
order impugned in my opinion, are based on no
materials.
Though it was strenuously argued by
Mr. Pandey that in absence of any response by
the petitioner the allegations would be deemed
to have been admitted but in my opinion even if
the show cause reply was missing, the orders
passed by the statutory authorities having civil
consequences and resulting in cancellation
should reflect application of mind.
Unfortunately it is grossly missing inasmuch as
neither the order of the Licensing Authority nor
the order of the appellate authority deal with the
materials which formed the basis to drive home
the charges. The orders impugned are
indefensible and cannot be upheld."
8. A perusal of the show-cause notice issued to the
petitioner does not reveal that the copy of the enquiry report was
enclosed along with the show-cause notice.
9. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances
and the law laid down by this Hon’ble Court, the present CWJC
is allowed. The impugned order dated 13.08.2024 passed by the
Sub-Divisional Officer is set aside. The matter is remanded back
to the Sub-divisional Officer (Respondent No. 3) for furnishing
Patna High Court CWJC No.13924 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
5/5
a copy of the enquiry report and any other material relied on the
petitioner and call for his explanation by giving reasonable time.
10. On such show-cause notice being served, the
petitioner shall file his explanation within the stipulated time.
On receipt of the explanation submitted by the petitioner the
authority concerned shall pass a reasoned order strictly in
accordance with law duly taking into consideration the
explanation submitted by the petitioner.
11. It is needless to mention that before passing any
order, the petitioner shall be given an opportunity of hearing.
The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as
possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order. Any order passed shall be
communicated to the petitioner.
12. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is
allowed to the extent indicated above.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Gauravkr/-
U
Checking your session…