Patna High Court
Md. Hassan ImamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
Mere institution of an FIR is not a valid ground for suspension or cancellation of a PDS licence.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Hassan Imam, challenged the cancellation of his Public Distribution System (PDS) shop licence (License No. 01/2020) by the Sub Divisional Officer, which was based solely on the filing of an FIR (Case No. 73 of 2025). He sought a writ of certiorari to quash the cancellation order and a writ of mandamus to restore his licence. The court examined the PDS (Control) Order, 2001 and Rule 7 of G.S.R. No.1 dated 20‑02‑2007, finding that the mere institution of an FIR does not constitute a valid ground for licence suspension. Relying on the precedent set in Umesh Ram v. State of Bihar (AIR 2014 Patna 113), the court quashed the impugned order and directed that supplies be restored immediately. The court further clarified that if the petitioner is later convicted in the criminal case, appropriate action may be taken then. 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 licence under the PDS (Control) Order, 2001.
- Whether the Sub Divisional Officer acted within its statutory authority in issuing the cancellation order.
Subjects
- PDS licence
- First Information Report
- Cancellation order
- Writ of certiorari
- Writ of mandamus
- Administrative law
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17789 of 2025
======================================================
Md. Hassan Imam Son of Jafar Imam @ Md. Jafar Imam, Resident of
Village- Lalganj Milki, Ward No. 06, P.S.- Maranga, District- Purnea @
Purnia (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Consumer and
Food Supply Department, Government of Bihar.
2. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Purnea.
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Purnea.
4. The Block Supply Officer, Purnea, East Purnea, District- Purnea.
5. The District Manager, the State Food Corporation, Purnea.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prem Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Addl. Advocate General (04)
For the BSFC : Mr. Nirmal Kumar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filled for the
following reliefs:-
“1) That the instant application is
directed for passing necessary order/orders, or
direction as nature of the case may require
quashing the order passed by respondent No. 3
as contained in Memo No. 558, dated
30.08.2025 by way of issuing writ of certiorari
in as much as is directed for seeking direction to
the concern respondent authority to restore the
license of the shop (public distribution system
shop) being License No. 01/2020 by way of
issuing writ of mandamus as the said order
Patna High Court CWJC No.17789 of 2025(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
under challenge is perverse, arbitrary and ipso
facto bad.”
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 Maranga (Purnea) P.S. Case No. 73 of
2025 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 suspension 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 113 as well.
6. In view of the above, the impugned order dated
30.08.2025 is hereby quashed and set aside.
Patna High Court CWJC No.17789 of 2025(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
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…