Patna High Court
Sugandhi Kumari @ Suganti DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The court held that the petitioner must first avail herself of the statutory revision remedy under Section 32(vi) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, and therefore the writ petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Sugandhi Kumari, challenged the cancellation of her fair‑price shop licence issued by the Sub‑Divisional Officer under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, alleging illegality and irregularity. She appealed the S.D.O.’s order, which was dismissed by the Collector‑cum‑District Magistrate, and subsequently filed a writ petition seeking quash of the cancellation and restoration of the licence. The High Court observed that the petitioner has a specific statutory remedy under Section 32(vi) of the 2016 Control Order to seek revision before the Divisional Commissioner. Consequently, the Court directed her to pursue that revision and declined to entertain the writ. The petition was therefore disposed of without any substantive order on the licence matter.
Issues considered
- Whether the cancellation of the PDS dealership licence can be set aside by a writ of certiorari.
- Whether the petitioner’s statutory right to file a revision under Section 32(vi) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, bars the writ jurisdiction.
- Whether the court should direct restoration of the licence pending the revision.
Subjects
- PDS
- fair price shop licence
- cancellation
- writ petition
- revision
- Section 32(vi)
- Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System
- administrative law
- alternative remedy
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17786 of 2025
======================================================
Sugandhi Kumari @ Suganti Devi W/o Madan Patel Resident of Village-
Pannapur Ranjita, P.S.- Harsidhi, District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and
Consumer Protection, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, East Champaran (Motihari).
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Areraj, District- East Champaran (Motihari).
4. The District Supply Officer, East Champaran (Motihari).
5. The Block Supply Officer, Harsidhi, District- East Champaran (Motihari).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader 14
For the State : Mr. Dhurjati Kr. Pd., Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 Heard the learned counsels for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief(s):-
“(i) To issue an appropriate order/s,
direction/s including a writ preferably in the
nature of CERTIORARI for quashing of the
order dated 11-07-2025 passed in PDS Appeal
Case No. 01/ 2025-26 passed by learned
Collector-cum-District Magistrate, East
Champaran, Motihari by which he dismissed the
appeal filed by the petitioner and affirm the
order passed by the S.D.O. Areraj on 27-10-
2018 vide Memo No. 02 (Go).
(ii) To quash the order as contained
Patna High Court CWJC No.17786 of 2025(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
in Memo No. 02 (Go), dated 27-10-2018 issued
by the learned S.D.O. Areraj, East Champaran
(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
amongst to the consumers.
(iii) To direct the respondent NO. 03
the S.D.O., Areraj, East Champaran 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. 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.17786 of 2025(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
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 off.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Gauravkr/-
U
Checking your session…