Tilottama Boro Rajbongshi Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

2:THE COMMISSIONER FOOD PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND LEGAL METROLOGY DEPARTMENT R. K. MISSION ROAD P.O. - ULUBARI DIST - KAMRUP METRO GUWAHATI-781007.

¶12

3:THE DIRECTOR

¶13

FOOD PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT R. K. MISSION ROAD P.O. - ULUBARI DIST - KAMRUP METRO GUWAHATI-781007.

¶14

4:THE CO-DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DISPUR CO-DISTRICT

Page No.# 2/5

BASISTHA

GUWAHATI- 781029.

5:THE INSPECTOR FOOD PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE CO-DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BASISTHA GUWAHATI- 781029

¶19

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N M HAZARIKA,

¶20

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,

¶21

BEFORE

¶22

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

¶23

ORDER

¶24

11/02/2026

¶25

Heard Mr. N M Hazarika, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M Chetia, learned State counsel appearing for all the respondents.

¶26

2. The petitioner in the present proceeding has raised a grievance with regard to nonconsideration of her application for renewal of the Fair Price Shop licence issued to her earlier which had in the meantime lapsed. The husband of the petitioner was issued a licence for a Fair Price Shop in his name in the month of December, 1995. The said licence in terms of the conditions holding the field was being renewed every year. Thereafter, the Government vide a Notification dated 21.12.2021 laid down that the renewal of the Fair Price Shop licence would be now required to be carried out every 3 (three) years and an application in this connection is required to be submitted by the licence holder before the last date of expiry of such licence.

¶27

3. It is also projected that the husband of the petitioner was suffering from eye disease and was also under medical treatment continuously and accordingly, he being not in a

¶28

Page No.# 3/5

¶29

position to operate the Fair Price Shop, the husband of the petitioner in the year 2022 approached the respondent authorities to cancel his said licence and to transfer the same in the name of the present petitioner.

¶30

Accordingly, accepting the prayer made by the petitioner’s husband, the Deputy Director, Food, Public Distribution & Consumer Affairs, Kamrup Metropolitan District, Guwahati vide an order dated 31.08.2023 proceeded to cancel the licence issued in favour of the husband of the petitioner and vide the same order, the said licence was issued in the name of the petitioner, herein. In terms of the said order dated 31.08.2023, a licence in the format prescribed under the Assam Public Distribution of Articles Orders, 1982 came to be issued to the petitioner on 17.09.2023. The said licence of the petitioner was valid till 31.03.2024. The petitioner was required to submit an application for renewal of her licence, prior to the date of lapse of validity of the same. However, the petitioner failed to submit such application. The petitioner submitted an application for renewal of her licence only on 17.03.2025. In the meantime, a show-cause notice was also issued to the petitioner, alleging violation of certain provisions of the terms and conditions appended to the licence issued to her. The petitioner not having renewed her licence before 31.03.2024, her application was not given a consideration.

¶31

Being aggrieved, the petitioner has instituted the present proceedings.

¶32

4. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

¶33

5. The facts, noticed hereinabove, are not disputed by the learned counsels for the parties.

¶34

6. Admittedly, the licence which was transferred in the name of the petitioner was to lapse, w.e.f. 31.03.2024 and she was required to submit an application for renewal of the same along with the fee prior to the said date. However, the petitioner is found to have failed to submit the said application in time. Subsequently, the petitioner had submitted an application for renewal of her licence on 17.03.2025, i.e., nearly after a year from the date the licence issued to her had lapsed. The respondent authorities basing on the delay

¶35

Page No.# 4/5

¶36

occasioning in submission of application for renewal of the licence of the petitioner, proceeded to attach the beneficiaries of her shop with a nearby shop of one Bishal Singh till the licence of the petitioner is renewed or a fresh licence is issued in her favour.

¶37

7. The respondents have filed an affidavit in the matter and therein, they have contended that the petitioner, although, had submitted a delayed application for renewal of a PDS retail licence, she had failed to annex, thereto, the requisite documents. It is further projected that the respondents had required the petitioner to submit the relevant documents, including a Trade Licence, Bank Passbook, Aadhar card, Voter Identity Card and Pan Card, however, the petitioner had failed to submit the said documents.

¶38

8. A perusal of the affidavit filed by the respondents would go to reveal that the respondents are not seriously disputing the claim of the petitioner for renewal of her licence. However, in view of the fact that there was a delay in submission of the application for such renewal by the petitioner and also the said application, not being accompanied by the requisite documents, further processing of the matter was not taken forward.

¶39

9. In view of the above position, this Court directs the petitioner, herein, to file a fresh application for renewal of her licence/issuance of a fresh licence and to enclose therein all the requisite documents, as noticed hereinabove, within a period of 15 (fifteen) days from today.

¶40

10. On receipt of such application, the Deputy Director, Food, Public Distribution & Consumer Affairs, Kamrup Metropolitan District, Guwahati shall process the same and in the event there is no bar found to exist for restraining the respondents from renewing the licence of the petitioner/issuing a fresh licence to her for operating her Fair Price Shop, the respondent authorities shall renew the lapsed licence of the petitioner and/or issue to her a fresh one, within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of submission of the application by the petitioner in terms of the directions passed, hereinabove.

¶41

11. The respondent authorities would also be at liberty to enquire into any misconduct that may be found to exist against the petitioner while the licence issued to her was in currency. However, in the event any action in this connection is required to be taken against the petitioner, such action would be taken strictly in accordance with law, after affording to

¶42

Page No.# 5/5

¶43

her an opportunity of hearing.

¶44

12. With the above observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed

¶45

of.

¶46

JUDGE

¶47

Comparing Assistant

Tilottama Boro Rajbongshi v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tilottama Boro Rajbongshi v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sambhu Charan Barman Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

National Health Mission Employees Association, Assam and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Sabitri Talukdar Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Ms Tharu and Sons Vs the Union of India

Pradip Borbora Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Dipmoni Bordoloi Vs the State of Assam and Ors.