Patna High Court
Mina Devi @ Mina KunwarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
Mere institution of an FIR is not a valid ground for cancellation of a PDS licence under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.
Summary
Mina Devi, a fair price shop licence holder under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System, challenged the cancellation of her licence which was based solely on the institution of an FIR against her. She filed a writ petition seeking quashing of the orders dated 23.01.2024 and 05.03.2026 that revoked her licence. The Court examined the PDS (Control) Order, 2001 and Rule 7 of the 2007 notification, holding that a mere FIR does not constitute a valid ground for suspension or cancellation of a licence. The decision was supported by the precedent set in Umesh Ram v. State of Bihar (AIR 2014 Patna 113). Consequently, both the SDO’s and the District Magistrate’s orders were set aside, the licence was restored, and the petition was allowed, with a proviso that action may be taken if a conviction occurs or other conditions are violated.
Issues considered
- Whether the mere institution of a First Information Report is a sufficient ground for cancellation of a PDS dealership licence under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.
- Whether the authorities can cancel a licence without a criminal conviction under the said Order.
- Whether the orders of the Sub‑Divisional Officer and the District Magistrate are ultra vires the statutory provisions.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- PDS licence
- Cancellation
- First Information Report
- Writ petition
- Certiorari
- Public Distribution System
- Administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7882 of 2026
======================================================
Mina Devi @ Mina Kunwar W/o Late Mahesh Paswan, Resident of Village-
Paini Bedauli, Panchayat-Naudiha, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and
Civil Supplies, Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Gaya.
3. The District Supply Officer, Gaya.
4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sherghati, Gaya.
5. The Block Supply Officer, Imamganj, Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhash, Advocate.
Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nagendra Prasad Yadav, SC 23.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
3 07-07-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filed for the
following relief/s:-
“(i) To issue an appropriate order/s
direction/s including a writ preferably in the
nature of Certiorari for quashing of the order
dated 05.03.2026 as contained in Memo No. 954
Vidhi Passed by District Magistrate, Gaya
passed in Supply Appeal Case No. 09/2025 by
which the learned District Magistrate, Gaya
affirm the order passed in Memo No. 50/Aa
Sherghati, dated 23.01.2024 issued by the
learned SDO Sherghati, Gaya (hereinafter
referred to as Licensing Authority under the
Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System
Patna High Court CWJC No.7882 of 2026(3) dt.07-07-2026
2/3
(Control) Order, 2016 whereby and whereunder
he has cancel the fair price shop license 76/2016
of the petitioner for committing illegality and
irregularity in distribution of food grains
amongst to the consumers.
(ii) To direct the respondent No. 4 the
SDO Sherghati, Gaya to restore the PDS
dealership license of the petitioner henceforth
with taking into the consideration that the same
is only means of earning livelihood.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
solitary ground given in the show cause notice dated 15.06.2024
vide Memo No. 282 for cancellation of the PDS licence of the
petitioner was that an First Information Report (F.I.R.) bearing
Imamganj P. S. Case No. 170 of 2024 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.
Patna High Court CWJC No.7882 of 2026(3) dt.07-07-2026
3/3
6. In view of the above, the impugned order dated
05.03.2026 passed by the District Magistrate, Gaya and the order
dated 23.01.2024 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer,
Sherghati, Gaya are both set aside.
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 her,
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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.