Fair price shop attachment without notice and hearing under Clause 16 violates natural justice.

The petitioner-society had been allotted a fair price shop for the distribution of essential commodities under the Madhya Pradesh Public Distribution System and claimed to have been operating it in accordance with the Madhya Pradesh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015.

By order dated 16.01.2026, the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Pohari, District Shivpuri, withdrew the shop from the petitioner and temporarily attached it to other societies.

The petitioner challenged the order under Article 226 of the Constitution, contending that no proper show-cause notice was issued and no effective opportunity of hearing was granted before the adverse action was taken.

The State supported the impugned order as having been passed by the competent authority under the applicable legal framework.

Whether the petitioner’s fair price shop could be withdrawn and attached to other societies without issuing a proper show-cause notice and granting an effective opportunity of hearing under Clause 16 of the Madhya Pradesh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015?

Whether the order dated 16.01.2026 was liable to be set aside for violation of the principles of natural justice and the prescribed procedure under the Control Order, 2015?

The Court applied Clause 16 of the Madhya Pradesh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015, particularly sub-clause (4), which requires the competent authority to provide the concerned society a proper opportunity of hearing before cancellation or adverse action affecting authorization to operate a fair price shop.

The Court reiterated the general principle of natural justice that an order producing civil consequences cannot ordinarily be passed without reasonable notice and an effective opportunity of hearing, unless such opportunity is lawfully excluded.

The Court also relied on Shri Janki Swa Sahayata Samooh Satanpura Guna Through Its President Ram Dulari v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others, W.P. No. 24360 of 2024, decided on 21.08.2024, which was held to squarely cover the dispute.

The attachment of the petitioner’s fair price shop adversely affected its right to operate the shop and therefore entailed civil consequences.

Since the record did not show that the petitioner had been served with a proper show-cause notice or afforded an effective and reasonable hearing before the order dated 16.01.2026 was passed, the procedure contemplated by Clause 16 of the Control Order, 2015 had not been followed.

Applying the principles of natural justice and the precedent in Shri Janki Swa Sahayata Samooh, the Court concluded that the impugned action was procedurally unsustainable, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations or the petitioner’s entitlement to continue operating the shop.

The order dated 16.01.2026 was set aside insofar as it related to the petitioner-society.

The respondents were directed to restore operation of the petitioner’s fair price shop, subject to the outcome of any proceedings lawfully initiated and concluded in accordance with the Control Order, 2015.

The directions issued in paragraph 7 of Shri Janki Swa Sahayata Samooh Satanpura were directed to apply mutatis mutandis.

The Court clarified that it had expressed no view on the merits of the case.