Patna High Court
Akalesh Kumar @ Akalesh PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The suspension of the petitioner's PDS licence on the basis of an FIR is invalid and the impugned order is set aside.
Summary
Akalesh Kumar, a PDS licence holder, challenged the suspension of his licence by the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Arwal, which was based solely on the institution of an FIR (Case No. 80 of 2025). The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the suspension and a mandamus directing an inquiry into alleged bribery by a supply officer. The High Court examined the PDS (Control) Order, 2001 and Rule 7 of G.S.R. No. 1 (2007), holding that the mere filing 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 set aside the impugned order and ordered immediate restoration of supplies. It further clarified that future action may be taken if the petitioner is convicted or violates other PDS conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the mere institution of a First Information Report is a sufficient ground for suspension of a Public Distribution System licence under the PDS (Control) Order, 2001 and related rules.
- Whether the Sub‑Divisional Officer acted ultra vires in suspending the licence on the basis of the FIR.
- Whether a writ of mandamus directing an inquiry into alleged bribery against a supply officer is warranted.
Subjects
- PDS licence
- Suspension
- First Information Report
- Certiorari
- Mandamus
- Administrative law
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19881 of 2025
======================================================
Akalesh Kumar @ Akalesh Prasad, Son of Late Damodar Lal, Resident of
Manikpur, P.S.-Kurtha, District-Arwal.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Food Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old
Secretariat, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Arwal, Bihar.
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Arwal, at Arwal, Bihar.
4. The Block Supply Officer, Block-Kurtha, District-Arwal, Bihar.
5. The Assistant District Supply Officer, Kurtha, Arwal, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surya Swetabh, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Advocate General
======================================================
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 filled for the
following reliefs:-
“...for issuance of an appropriate writ
in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the
order dated 17.09.2025 (Annexure P/6) passed
by the Respondent No. 3, the Sub Divisional
Officer, Arwal, Bihar by which the Public
Distribution System (PDS) License of the
petitioner has been illegally and arbitrarily
suspended.
(ii) For issuance of appropriate
writ/writs in the nature of mandamus directing
the concerned respondent to inquire in to
allegations made by the petitioner vide e-mail
dated 01.11.2024 to the Respondent No. 2
wherein accusations of demand of bribe had
Patna High Court CWJC No.19881 of 2025(5) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
been made against the Respondent No. 4.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
solitary ground given in the show cause notice dated 09.09.2025
vide Memo No.467 for cancellation of the PDS licence of the
petitioner was that First Information Report (F.I.R.) bearing
Manikpur P.S. Case No. 80 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
17.09.2025 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Arwal
(Annexure-P/6) is set aside.
7. Needless to say, supplies to the petitioner shall be
restored without delay.
Patna High Court CWJC No.19881 of 2025(5) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
8. It is made clear that, in case, the petitioner is
subsequently convicted in the criminal case instituted against him,
the authorities are free to take necessary action in accordance with
law.
9. However, this order will not preclude the authorities
from taking action if it is found that the petitioner has violated any
other condition of the provisions of the Bihar Targeted Public
Distribution System (Control) order strictly in accordance with
law.
10. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands
allowed to the extent indicated.
(A. Abhishek Reddy, J)
shakir/-
U
Checking your session…