Patna High Court
Naresh DasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
Mere institution of an FIR does not constitute a valid ground for cancellation of a PDS licence; the order dated 02‑01‑2025 is quashed.
Summary
Naresh Das, a fair‑price shop licensee, challenged the cancellation of his PDS dealership licence by the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Sherghati, on the ground that a First Information Report had been lodged against him. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 02‑01‑2025 and to have his licence restored as his means of livelihood. The Court examined the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 and Rule 7 of G.S.R. No. 1 (20‑02‑2007), holding that the mere institution of an FIR does not constitute a valid ground for licence cancellation. Relying on the precedent set in Umesh Ram v. State of Bihar (AIR 2014 Patna 113), the Court quashed the impugned order and directed immediate restoration of supplies, while reserving the right to act if the petitioner is later convicted. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed in the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the mere institution of a First Information Report is a sufficient ground for cancellation of a PDS dealership licence under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016/2001.
- Whether the order dated 02‑01‑2025 issued by the S.D.O. Sherghati is legally valid.
Subjects
- PDS licence
- Cancellation
- First Information Report
- Quashing order
- Public Distribution System
- Administrative law
- Writ of certiorari
- Livelihood
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15242 of 2025
======================================================
Naresh Das S/o Late Ram Das, Resident of Village- Goitha, P.S. and Anchal-
Bankey Bazar, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and
Civil Supplies, Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Gaya.
3. The District Supply Officer, Gaya.
4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sherghati, Gaya.
5. The Block Supply Officer, Bankey Bazar, Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate (2)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
3 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filled for the
following reliefs:-
“(i) To issue an appropriate order/s,
direction/s including a writ preferably in the
nature of CERTIORARI for quashing of the
order dated 02-01-2025 as contained in Memo
No. 01 Aa, Sherghati, dated 02-01-2025 issued
by the learned S.D.O. Sherghati, Gaya
(Hereinafter referred to as Licensing Authority
under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution
System (Control) order 2016) whereby and
where under he has cancel the fair price shop
license of the petitioner for committing illegality
and irregularity in distribution of food grains
Patna High Court CWJC No.15242 of 2025(3) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
amongst to the consumers.
(ii) To direct the respondent NO. 04
the S.D.O., Sherghati, Gaya to restore the P.D.S.
dealership license of the petitioner henceforth
with taking into the consideration that the same
is only means of earning livelihood.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
solitary ground given in the show cause notice for cancelling the
PDS licence of the petitioner was that an First Information
Report (F.I.R.) bearing Roshanganj (Bankebazar) P.S. Case No.
26 of 2024 had been instituted against the petitioner. Similarly,
the impugned order has been passed on the sole ground of
institution of the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents appears and
has been heard.
5. Having heard the parties and on consideration of
the materials on record, this Court finds merit in the writ
petition. A perusal of the PDS. (Control) Order, 2001 read with
Rule 7 of the notification in G.S.R. No. 1 dated 20.02.2007
makes it clear that mere institution of a First Information Report
would not constitute a valid ground for cancellation of the PDS
licence. This view finds support from the decision of this Court
in Umesh Ram vs. The State of Bihar and others, AIR 2014
Patna High Court CWJC No.15242 of 2025(3) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
Patna 113 as well.
6. In view of the above, the impugned order dated
02.01.2025 (Annexure-5) is hereby quashed and set aside.
7. Needless to say, supplies to the petitioner shall be
restored without delay.
8. It is made clear that, in case, the petitioner is
subsequently convicted in the criminal case instituted against
him, thereafter, the authorities are free to take necessary action
in accordance with law.
9. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands
allowed to the extent indicated.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Gauravkr/-
U
Checking your session…