Patna High Court
Manoranjan Kumar DeoversusThe 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 impugned orders are set aside.
Summary
Manoranjan Kumar Deo, the petitioner, challenged the suspension and subsequent cancellation of his PDS shop licence (No. 62/16) by the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Kahalgaon, which was based solely on an FIR lodged under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 alleging black‑marketing of food grains. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the orders and a mandamus directing the authorities to restore his licence and resume grain supplies. The respondents argued that the FIR justified the suspension. The High Court held that, under the PDS (Control) Order, 2001 and Rule 7 of G.S.R. No. 1 dated 20‑02‑2007, the mere institution of an FIR is not a valid ground for licence cancellation, a view supported by the precedent Umesh Ram v. State of Bihar (AIR 2014 Patna 113). Consequently, both the September 19, 2025 and November 22, 2025 orders were set aside and the petitioner’s supply of food grains was ordered to be restored, subject to future action if he is convicted in the criminal case. The writ petition was allowed in the manner indicated.
Issues considered
- Whether the mere institution of an FIR under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 constitutes a valid ground for suspension or cancellation of a PDS licence.
- Whether the orders passed by the Sub‑Divisional Officer are violative of the PDS (Control) Order, 2001 and the relevant notification.
- Whether a mandamus can be issued to compel restoration of the licence and resumption of grain supplies.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- PDS licence
- Suspension
- FIR
- Essential Commodities Act
- Certiorari
- Mandamus
- Administrative law
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.503 of 2026
======================================================
Manoranjan Kumar Deo, Son of Shdanand Prasad Deo, Resident of Village-
Ward No.- 3, Ekdara Kahalgaon, P.S.- Buddhu Chak, District- Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer
Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, District- Bhagalpur.
3. The District Supply Officer, District- Bhagalpur.
4. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Kahalgaon, Bhagalpur.
5. The Block Supply Officer, Kahalgaon, Bhagalpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kumar Gaurav, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Government Pleader (23)
MR. Sanjay Kumar, AC to GP 23
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
4 01-04-2026 I.A. No. 01 of 2026
For the reasons stated in the Interlocutory Application,
the same is allowed.
2. Registry is directed to make the necessary changes
in the prayer portion of the present writ petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. The present Writ Petition has been filled for the
following reliefs:-
“A. A Writ in the nature of certiorari or any
other appropriate writ order for quashing &
setting aside the order passed by the Sub
Divisional Officer, Kahalgaon vide Memo
No.743 dated 19.09.2025 whereby and where
Patna High Court CWJC No.503 of 2026(4) dt.01-04-2026
2/4
under license of the petitioner P.D.S shop
bearing License No. 62/16 has been
suspended only on the basis of the F.I.R
registered against the petitioner under 7 of
the E. C. Act 1955 in Buddhu Chak P.S. Case
No. 80/2025 alleged allegation of black
marketing of food grains contained therein
Annexure -P/4 with some general, ominous,
false, fabricated & self manufactured
allegations have leveled against him
prejudicially & purely with pure malicious
intention which is beyond the truth & fact of
this matter.
B. A mandamus commanding the Respondent
i.e. S.D.O, Kahalgaon to restore the
petitioner P.D.S. Shop license bearing license
No. 62/16 contained therein Annexure
-P/1(Series) and consumers of P.D.S shop of
the petitioner as before and resume the
monthly allotment of food grains as same as
before.
C. Any other relief or reliefs for which the
petitioner may be found entitled in the fact
and circumstances of the present case may be
granted to him.”
5. The following paragraph has been added vide order
dated 01.04.2026 through I. A. No. 01 of 2026.
"quashing & setting aside the order passed
by the Sub- Divisional Officer, Kahalgaon
containing Memo No. 905 dated 22.11.2025
contained therein Annexure -P/8 whereby
and where under license of the petitioner
P.D.S shop bearing License No. 62/2016 has
Patna High Court CWJC No.503 of 2026(4) dt.01-04-2026
3/4
been Cancelled only on the basis of a F.I.R
has been lodged against the petitioner in
Buddhuchak P.S. Case no.80/ 2025 dated
13.09.2025 with some general, ominous,
false, fabricated & self manufactured
allegations have leveled against him
prejudicially & purely with pure malicious
intention which is beyond the truth & fact
of this matter.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
solitary ground given in the order dated 19.09.2025 vide Memo
No. 743 for suspending the PDS licence of the petitioner was
that an First Information Report (F.I.R.) bearing Buddhu Chak
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.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents appears and
has been heard.
8. 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.503 of 2026(4) dt.01-04-2026
4/4
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 113 as well.
9. In view of the above, the impugned order dated
19.09.2025 (Annexure P/7) as well as the order dated
22.11.2025 (Annexure P/8) are also set aside.
10. Needless to say, supplies to the petitioner shall be
restored without delay.
11. 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.
12. With the above directions, the Writ Petition
stands allowed to the extent indicated.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Bhardwaj/-
U
Checking your session…