Allowed

Kanti Kunwar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Dec 2024CWJC/11843/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging cancellation of a public distribution system licence. The court held that the show-cause notice lacked any proposal for cancellation, contrary to Rule 27(ii) of the Control Order, 2016 per its full Bench ruling. All impugned orders were set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh show-cause notice.

What did the court decide?

Impugned cancellation and appellate/revisional orders set aside; matter remanded to SDO for fresh show-cause notice in compliance with Rule 27(ii), with hearing and reasoned order within eight weeks.

Kanti Kunwar Vs The State of Bihar — Public Procurement and Tenders | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11843 of 2022

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Kanti Kunwar, aged about 57 years, (Female) W/o Ambika Prasad, Resident of Village- Masrakh Takht, P.S.- Masrakh, District- Saran at Chapra.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra.

¶8

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Marhaura, District- Saran at Chapra.

¶9

The Block Supply Officer, Masrakh, District- Saran at Chapra.

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. K. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Arvind Ujjwal ( SC 4 ).

¶12

======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY ORAL ORDER

¶14

4 11-12-2024 Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶15

2 . This writ petition has been filed for seeking the

¶16

following relief(s)

¶17

“….for issuance of writ in the appropriate nature for quashing of the order dated 22.11.2006 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Marhaura, District Saran whereby the Public Distribution System Licence of the petitioner has been cancelled and against the order passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Officer the petitioner moved before the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra in Supply Appeal No. 56/2006 and same was also affirmed by the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra dated 26.08.2019 and again against the order passed by the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra the petitioner preferred Revision Case No. 29/2021 and the same was also dismissed on 04.03.2022 by the learned Commissioner, Saran at Chapra.”

¶18

3 . Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.11843 of 2022(4) dt.11-12-2024 2/4

¶20

petitioner has stated that in the Show Cause Notice issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, there is no proposal for cancellation of the license. Learned counsel has stated that non-mentioning of the proposal for cancelling his license is contrary to the provisions of order 27(ii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Order, 2016’).

¶21

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgment of the full Bench passed in CWJC No. 21202 of 2021 and analogous cases dated 26.09.2023 to buttress his contention that non-mentioning of the proposed action in the show-cause notice is bad in law and contrary to Rule 27(ii) of the Control Order, 2016.

¶22

5. Learned counsel has stated in view of the above mentioned provisions of law and judgment relied by the petitioner, the impugned order may be set aside and matter remanded back to the authorities concerned for issuing a fresh show-cause notice in terms of order 27(ii) of the Control Order, 2016 and thereafter take necessary action.

¶23

6 . Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has vehemently opposed the very maintainability of the writ petition and stated that the present

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.11843 of 2022(4) dt.11-12-2024 3/4

¶25

writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has exhausted all the remedies and all the authorities have found that the petitioner has violated the provisions of the Control Order, 2016. Learned counsel has therefore prayed this Hon’ble Court to dismiss the present writ petition.

¶26

7 . This Hon’ble Court in CWJC No. 21202 of 2021

¶27

and analogous cases has held as under:

¶28

“19. Accordingly, we answer the reference as under:-

¶29

It is mandatory for a licensing authority issuing a notice under order 27(ii) to a license to mention that there is a proposal for cancellation of his license, failing which such notice cannot be treated to be a valid notice of giving sufficient opportunity to the licensee to state his case under order 27(ii) of the BTPDS Control Order. ”

¶30

8 . A perusal of the show-cause notice issued to the

¶31

petitioner does not reveal that there is any proposal of the action sought to be taken against the petitioner. Therefore, the same has to held as bad, illegal, contrary to the provisions of Rule 27(ii) of the Control Order and has to necessarily set aside.

¶32

9 . Having regard to the above facts and circumstances and the law laid down by this Hon’ble Court, the present CWJC is allowed. The impugned order dated 22.11.2006 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Marhaura, District-Saran, at Chapra, the order dated 26.08.2019 passed by the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra and the order dated 04.03.2022 passed by the

¶33

Patna High Court CWJC No.11843 of 2022(4) dt.11-12-2024 4/4

¶34

Commissioner, Saran at Chapra are set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Sub-divisional Officer for issuing a fresh show-cause notice to the petitioner strictly in compliance with the provisions of Rule 27(ii) of the Control Order, 2016 and call for his explanation by giving him reasonable time.

¶35

10 . On such show-cause notice being served, the petitioner shall file his explanation within the stipulated time. On receipt of the explanation submitted by the petitioner the authority concerned shall pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law duly taking into consideration the explanation submitted by the petitioner.

¶36

11. It is needless to mention that before passing any orders, the petitioner shall be given an opportunity of hearing. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Any order passed shall be communicated to the petitioner.

¶37

12 . With the above directions, this Writ Petition is allowed to the extent indicated.

¶38

(A. Abhishek Reddy, J)

¶39

shakir/- U

Kanti Kunwar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanti Kunwar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yaqeub Kuraishi @ Yakub Kuraishi Vs The State of Bihar

Shailendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

M/S Bajrang Enterprises Vs The State of Bihar

Bindeshwari Tanti Vs The State of Bihar

Surendra Giri Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Badrul Hussain Vs The State of Bihar