Patna High Court
Jai Prakash GuptaversusThe State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The suspension of the PDS license solely on the basis of a FIR and without satisfying Clause 28 conditions is illegal, and the impugned order is set aside with the license restored.
Summary
The petitioner, a PDS dealer, challenged the suspension of his license issued by the Sub‑Divisional Officer on the ground that a FIR had been lodged under the Essential Commodities Act. The petitioner argued that the suspension violated Clause 28 of the Bihar Targeted PDS (Control) Order, 2016, which permits suspension only if the licensee is a fugitive or imprisoned, and that a mere FIR is not a valid ground for cancellation. The court examined the statutory provisions, the 180‑day limit for suspension without a final order, and prior judgments holding that an FIR alone cannot justify license cancellation. Relying on Umesh Ram v. State of Bihar and earlier Patna High Court decisions, the court held the suspension illegal and set aside the impugned order. Accordingly, the license was restored and the authorities were directed to resume supply of food grains to the petitioner’s fair‑price shop.
Issues considered
- Whether suspension of a PDS license under Clause 28 of the Bihar Targeted PDS (Control) Order, 2016 is valid when the licensee is neither a fugitive nor imprisoned.
- Whether the mere institution of a FIR under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act constitutes a sufficient ground for suspension or cancellation of a PDS license.
- Whether a suspension can lawfully continue beyond 180 days without a final adjudicatory order.
Legislation cited
- Essential Commodities Act — s. 7
Subjects
- Public Distribution System
- License suspension
- Essential Commodities Act
- FIR
- Administrative law
- Certiorari
- Mandamus
- Bihar
- Clause 28
- Procedural fairness
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6472 of 2026
======================================================
Jai Prakash Gupta, Son of Laxmi Prasad Gupta, Resident of Village -
Majhwaliya, P.S. - Vijayipur, District- Gopalganj, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer
Protection Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Bihar,
Patna.
3. The District Magistrate-cum- Collector, Gopalganj.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) cum Licensing Authority, Hathua,
District- Gopalganj.
5. The District Supply Officer, Gopalganj.
6. The Block Supply Officer (BSO), Vijayipur, District- Gopalganj.
7. The Station House Officer (SHO), Vijayipur Police Station, District-
Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prince Kumar Mishra, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha, GA 8.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief(s) :
“A. For issuance of writ in the
nature of Certiorari, quashing the Memo
No. 2209 dated 19.09.2025 issued by
Respondent No.3 (Sub-Divisional Officer,
Hathua), whereby and whereunder, the
Public Distribution System (PDS) License
No. 02/2020 of the petitioner has been
suspended merely on the ground of
Patna High Court CWJC No.6472 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/4
institution of Vijayipur P.S. Case
No.299/2025, dated 12.09.2025, u/s 7 of
Essential Commodities Act which is
contrary to law laid down in case Umesh
Ram vs. The State of Bihar and others,
AIR 2014 Patna and Order dated
26.10.2024 passed in CWJC
No.9891/2024 (Mukesh Kumar Singh Vs
State of Bihar) and several decisions of
this Hon'ble Court.
B. Further holding and
declaring that such suspension, based
merely on lodging of an FIR, is illegal,
arbitrary and unsustainable in the eyes of
law, being contrary to the law laid down
by this Hon'ble Court in Umesh Ram vs.
State of Bihar & Ors., AIR 2014 Patna, as
well as in CWJC No. 9891 of 2024
(Mukesh Kumar Singh vs. State of Bihar
& Ors.), order dated 26.10.2024, and
other binding precedents.
C. For issuance of an
appropriate writ, order, or direction in the
nature of mandamus, directing the
respondent authorities to immediately
restore PDS License No. 02/2020 in favor
of the petitioner and resume the
supply/allotment of essential commodities
to the petitioner's fair price shop without
any further delay.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the
impugned order dated 19.09.2025 passed by the Sub-Divisional
Officer, Hathua, District-Gopalganj (Respondent No. 4) on two
grounds, (1) that the same is violation of Clause 28 of the Bihar
Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016
Patna High Court CWJC No.6472 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/4
(hereinafter referred to as, “the Control Order, 2016”) and (2)
further that the suspension of the license is only on the basis of
the FIR. Learned counsel has relied on the judgments of the this
Court passed in C.W.J.C. No. 16733 of 2016, dated 07.03.2017
and C.W.J.C. No. 8168 of 2023 in support of his case.
4. Admittedly, in the present case the license of the
petitioner was suspended on 19.09.2025 and till date no final
orders have been passed by the authority.
5. A perusal of Clause 28 of the Control Order, 2016,
reveals that the license of the dealer can be suspended only
under two circumstances (1) that the license holder is a fugitive
and (2) that he is behind the bars, in the present case both the
conditions are missing. Further it is to be noted that even though
180 days have elapsed, till date the authorities have not passed
the final order, it is well settled law that the suspension cannot
be continued after lapse of 180 days.
6. Having regard to the judgments of this Court
passed in C.W.J.C. No. 16733 of 2016, dated 07.03.2017 and
C.W.J.C. No. 8168 of 2023 wherein this Court has held as
under:
“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
Patna High Court CWJC No.6472 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
4/4
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.”
7. Having regard to the above, the impugned order
dated 19.09.2025 is set aside. The license of the petitioner is
directed to be restored. The authorities are further directed to
restore the supply of the food grains immediately so as to enable
the petitioner to distribute the grains to the consumers.
8. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is
allowed to the extent indicated.
(A. Abhishek Reddy, J)
shakir/-
U
Checking your session…