Patna High Court
M/s Bharat Khad Beej Bhandar,versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The authority must pass a reasoned order on the merits and cannot cancel a fertilizer license merely because the licensee failed to file an explanation to a show‑cause notice.
Summary
M/s Bharat Khad Beej Bhandar, a fertilizer retailer, challenged the cancellation of its license (No. 73/2011-12) by the District Agriculture Officer, Araria, which was based solely on its failure to file a response to a show‑cause notice. The petitioner argued that it could not respond due to the death of his brother and that the authority had not provided the inspection report required for a fair hearing. The State contended that the procedural requirements were met and the cancellation was valid. The High Court held that even when a licensee does not file an explanation, the authority is legally bound to decide the matter on its merits rather than cancel the license merely for non‑response. Consequently, the court set aside both the cancellation order and the appellate dismissal, remanding the matter to the District Agriculture Officer to pass a reasoned order after giving the petitioner a proper opportunity to be heard.
Issues considered
- Whether a fertilizer license can be cancelled solely on the ground that the licensee failed to file an explanation to a show‑cause notice.
- Whether the authority must pass a reasoned order on the merits before cancelling the license.
- Whether the petitioner was denied a fair hearing under principles of natural justice.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- fertilizer license
- cancellation
- show‑cause notice
- natural justice
- right to be heard
- administrative law
- appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18411 of 2025
======================================================
M/s Bharat Khad Beej Bhandar, Jokihat, Araria, through its proprietor Afjal
Husain, aged about 59 years (Male), S/o Dost Mohammad, Resident of
Village-Sisauna, Ward No. 10, P.S.-Jokihat, District-Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Director, Agriculture, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Agriculture, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Joint Director, Agriculture, Purnea.
4. The District Agriculture Officer, Araria.
5. The Agriculture Coordinator cum-Fertilizer Inspector, Jokihat, District
Araria.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Dhananjaya Nath Tiwari, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate (02) with
Mr. Akhileshwar Singh, AC to GA 2.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
5 28-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:-
“….for issuance of the writ in
the nature of certiorari for quashing the
order contained in Memo No. 232 dated
24.01.2025 passed by the District
Agriculture Officer, Araria by which the
retail license of the petitioner being
License No. 73/2011-12 renewal No.
03/2020-21 issued under the provisions
of the Fertilizer Control Order, 1985 has
been cancelled even without show cause
Patna High Court CWJC No.18411 of 2025(5) dt.28-04-2026
2/6
reply of the petitioner and that too on the
basis of FIR being Jokihat P.S. Case No.
13/2020 and further for quashing the
appellate order contained in Memo No.
432 dated 27.09.2025 passed by the Joint
Director Agriculture, Purnea by which he
was pleased to dismiss the statutory
appeal being Appeal No. 15/2024-25
filed on behalf of the petitioner without
appreciating the points raised on behalf
of the petitioner and further be pleased to
restore the license of the petitioner.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the petitioner has been granted the
fertilizer license by the respondent-authority and he has been
conducting his business since 2011-12. Learned counsel submits
that the authority based on an inspection dated 14.01.2025 has
issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner on 16.01.2025. In
the said show-cause notice, the petitioner was directed to file his
explanation by 23.01.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner’s brother died on 14.01.2025 and
therefore, the petitioner could not file his explanation to the said
show-cause notice dated 16.01.2025. That the authority on
24.01.2025 has passed the impugned order of cancellation of
the license issued to the petitioner. Though the petitioner has
preferred an appeal before the statutory authority, the same was
also dismissed confirming the orders passed by the District
Agriculture Officer, Araria. Learned counsel submits that a
Patna High Court CWJC No.18411 of 2025(5) dt.28-04-2026
3/6
perusal of the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner would
reveal that the District Agriculture Officer, Araria had called for
a report from the Block Agriculture Officer but the said report
was not made available to the petitioner. Learned counsel has
relied on the judgment passed by a Division Bench of this
Hon’ble Court in LPA No. 861 of 2004 dated 06.09.2004
(Yogendra Prasad v. The State of Bihar and Ors.). Learned
counsel submits that even if the show-cause was not filed by the
petitioner, the authority ought to had passed the orders on merits
but the impugned order of cancellation is passed solely on the
ground that the petitioner had not filed his explanation to the
show-cause notice. Learned counsel, therefore, prays this
Hon’ble Court to set aside the impugned order dated 27.09.2025
passed by the appellate authority and the order dated 24.01.2025
passed by the District Agriculture Officer, Araria and remand
the matter back to the District Agriculture Officer, Araria for
passing orders afresh duly giving the petitioner an opportunity
of filing his explanation and hearing.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the Respondent-State has vehemently opposed the very
maintainability of the present writ petition. Learned counsel has
stated that the petitioner was granted ample opportunity to file
Patna High Court CWJC No.18411 of 2025(5) dt.28-04-2026
4/6
his explanation to the show-cause notice. However, the
petitioner did not file the same, further it is submitted that the
procedure contemplated under the Act has been followed
scrupulously by the authority and, thereafter, the impugned
order of cancellation was passed. That the appellate authority
also did not find any merit in the appeal and the appeal was
accordingly dismissed. Learned counsel has, therefore, has
prayed this Hon’ble Court to dismiss the present writ petition.
5. Admittedly, in the present case, the show-cause
notice was issued on 16.01.2025 and the time granted to the
petitioner to file his explanation was till 23.01.2025. That
immediately on the very next day the impugned order of
cancellation was passed on 24.01.2025. In the writ petition filed
by the petitioner, a specific stand has been taken by the
petitioner at Para-11 that on 14.01.2025, the brother of the
petitioner, namely, Akhtar Husain had died due to Heart Attack,
that the petitioner became very disturbed and therefore, could
not file his explanation, the said averment has not been denied
in the counter-affidavit. Further, it is to be noted that the enquiry
report called for from the Block Agriculture Officer has also not
been supplied to the petitioner. Irrespective of the fact as to
whether the petitioner has filed his explanation or not the
Patna High Court CWJC No.18411 of 2025(5) dt.28-04-2026
5/6
authority ought to had passed the order on merits instead of
passing the orders of cancellation on the ground that the
petitioner did not file his explanation. A Division Bench of this
Hon’ble Court in LPA 861 of 2004 dated 06.09.2004 under
similar circumstances has held that even if the license holder
does not file any explanation to the show-cause notice, the
authority concerned are legally bound to the pass orders on
merits.
6. Having regard to the same, the impugned orders
dated 24.01.2025 passed by the District Agriculture Officer,
Araria and the order dated 27.09.2025 passed by the appellate
authority are both set aside. The matter is remanded back to the
District Agriculture Officer, Araria for passing orders afresh.
The authority before passing any order, shall grant an
opportunity to the petitioner for filing his explanation.
Thereafter, the authority shall pass a reasoned order duly taking
into consideration the explanation submitted by the petitioner. In
case, the petitioner does not file his explanation within the
stipulated time, the authority is free to pass necessary orders on
merits in accordance with law. The entire exercise is to be
completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a
period of 12 weeks from the date of the receipt of the copy of
Patna High Court CWJC No.18411 of 2025(5) dt.28-04-2026
6/6
this order. Any order passed shall be communicated to the party.
7. With the above directions, the present writ petition
stands disposed of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy, J)
shakir/-
U
Checking your session…