Patna High Court
Rajesh PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The suspension order is invalid as mere institution of an FIR does not constitute a ground for suspension under the applicable PDS orders, and is therefore set aside.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajesh Prasad, challenged the suspension of his PDS licence by the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Bagaha, which was based solely on the filing of an FIR (Case No. 395 of 2025). He sought a writ of mandamus to quash the suspension order, a reasoned reply to the show‑cause notice, and restoration of supplies. The Court examined the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 and the PDS (Control) Order, 2001, noting that mere institution of an FIR does not constitute a valid ground for licence suspension under Clause 18 and Rule 7. Relying on the precedent set in Umesh Ram v. State of Bihar (AIR 2014 Patna 113), the Court held the suspension order illegal and set it aside, directing immediate restoration of supplies. The judgment also clarified that future action may be taken if the petitioner is convicted or violates other conditions of the PDS order.
Issues considered
- Whether the suspension of a PDS licence on the sole ground of the institution of an FIR is permissible under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 and the PDS (Control) Order, 2001.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- PDS licence
- suspension
- FIR
- mandamus
- public distribution system
- administrative law
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8693 of 2026
======================================================
Rajesh Prasad, son of Ramanand Sah, resident of village - Taulaha, P.S.-
Ramnagar, District- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah.
4. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Bagaha, West Champaran.
5. The Block Supply Officer Ramnagar, Block, West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Government Advocate (11)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
2 24-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:-
“...for the issuance of writ in the
nature of mandamus to quash the office order
contained in memo no. 435 dated 04.07.2025
passed by Respondent No. 2, the Sub-Divisional
Officer, Bagaha, whereby in exercise of power
under Clause 18 of the Bihar Targeted Public
Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016,
License No. 100/2017 issued in favour of
petitioner has been suspended and further
direction has been issued upon the respondent
Block Supply officer, Ramnagar to send proposal
for attachment of PDS shop of the petitioner.
(ii) For further direction upon
Patna High Court CWJC No.8693 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
respondent authorities to pass reasoned order
upon reply to the show cause filed by the
operator of petitioner’s shop namely
Dharmendra Paswan to the show cause notice
contained in letter No. 497 dated 04.07.2025
within reasonable time and revoke the
suspension order.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
solitary ground given in the show cause notice dated 04.07.2025
vide Memo No.457 for cancellation of the PDS licence of the
petitioner was that an First Information Report (F.I.R.) bearing
Ramnagar P. S. Case No. 395 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.8693 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
04.07.2025 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bagaha is 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 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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.