Patna High Court
Prakash Lal Das @ Prahalad Lal DasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The orders cancelling the petitioner’s PDS licences dated 25‑09‑2018, 28‑10‑2021 and 18‑04‑2023 are set aside as they were passed without furnishing the enquiry report and thereby violated natural justice.
Summary
The petitioner, Prakash Lal Das, challenged three orders that cancelled his PDS licences – one dated 25‑09‑2018 by the Sub‑Divisional Officer, another dated 28‑10‑2021 by the Collector‑Cum‑Appellate Authority, and a third dated 18‑04‑2023 by the Divisional Commissioner. He argued that the show‑cause notices were issued without attaching the enquiry report, violating the principles of natural justice and depriving him of a fair hearing. The court relied on its earlier judgment (CWJC No.253 of 2014) which held that non‑supply of the enquiry report renders a cancellation order indefensible. Finding that the authorities had not furnished the enquiry report or the complainants’ statements, the court quashed all three orders. The matter was remanded to the Sub‑Divisional Officer to provide the enquiry report, the complainants’ statements, and to give the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to be heard before any further action. The court directed that the subsequent proceedings be completed within eight weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the cancellation of the petitioner’s PDS licences without furnishing the enquiry report violates the principles of natural justice.
- Whether the show‑cause notices issued without the enquiry report are valid.
- Whether the authorities erred in dismissing the petitioner’s appeal without considering the merit and evidence.
- Whether the orders of the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Collector‑Cum‑Appellate Authority and Divisional Commissioner can be set aside.
Subjects
- natural justice
- show‑cause notice
- PDS licence cancellation
- procedural fairness
- writ petition
- Supply Department
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14117 of 2023
======================================================
Prakash Lal Das @ Prahalad Lal Das, son of Sri Rashik Lal Sah, resident of
Village Amba, P.S. - Shahkund, Block Shahkund, District - Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer and
Protection Department Govt. of Bihar Old Secretariate, Patna - 5.
2. The Divisional Commissioner Bhagalpur Division, At Bhagalpur.
3. The Collector, Bhagalpur at Bhagalpur.
4. Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar Bhagalpur.
5. Block Supply Officer, Block, Shahkund District Bhagalpur.
6. The District Supply Officer Bhagalpur.
7. Block Supply Officer, Goradih, Prakhand.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Akhilesh Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.S. Raza Ahmad (AAG 5)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
6 10-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief(s):-
“(A) For quashing and setting aside the order
dated 25-09-2018 (Annexure-9) passed by the
Sub Divisional Officer, Bhagalpur Sadar
(respondent No. 4) illegally cancelling the
P.D.S. licence No. 01/92 (Old) and 27/2016
(New) on the basis of a callous enquiry report
dated 27-10-2015 and in contravention of the
direction of the Collector Appellate Authority
Bhagalpur given to him in P.D.S. Appeal No.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14117 of 2023(6) dt.10-03-2026
2/6
180/20116-17 on 20-04-2018
(B) For Quashing the order dated 2021 28-10-
(Anenxure-11) passed by the Collector-Cum-
Appellate Authority Bhagalpur illegally,
(respondent No. 3), the appeal dismissing
petition of the petitioner in P.D.S. appeal
petition of the petitioner in P.D.S. appeal case
No. 372/2018-19 without going in to the merit
and valid evidence produced by the appellant.
(C) For quashing and setting aside the order
dated 18-04-2023 (Anenxure-12) passed by the
Divisional Commissioner, Bhagalpur,
(respondent No. 2) illegally rejecting the
revision petition of the petitioner in supply
revision No. 6 /2022-23 (Prakash Lal Das Vrs
The State of Bihar And others) without
examining the legal issue involved and even
after submission of sufficient and valid evidence
produced by the petitioner before him. Hence,
all the above orders are fit to be set aside with
cost.
(D) For issuance of a writ any appropriate writ
application or order/direction commanding the
respondent authority his to restore the licence
and permit him to run the shop as usual.
(E) To issue any other order/ direction for
which the petitioner is entitled for.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has stated that the Sub-Divisional Officer while
Patna High Court CWJC No.14117 of 2023(6) dt.10-03-2026
3/6
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 non-
supply 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 that 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
maintainability of the writ petition. 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.14117 of 2023(6) dt.10-03-2026
4/6
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 food-
grains 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 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.14117 of 2023(6) dt.10-03-2026
5/6
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 orders dated 18.04.2023, 28.10.2021
and 25.09.2018 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, the
District Magistrate and the Sub-Divisional Officer, respectively,
are set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Sub-Divisional
Officer (Respondent No. 4) for furnishing a copy of the enquiry
report as well as the statement made by any of the complainants
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.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14117 of 2023(6) dt.10-03-2026
6/6
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)
Bhardwaj/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.