Patna High CourtAdministrative and Public LawCivil Procedure and Evidence

Fair-Price Shop Dealer’s Appeal Pending Since 2020: Patna HC Orders Decision Within 2 Months, Including His Claim Of 9 Charges Without Notice

Ashok Kumarv.The State of Bihar

Fair-Price Shop Dealer’s Appeal Pending Since 2020: Patna HC Orders Decision Within 2 Months, Including His Claim Of 9 Charges Without Notice. Ashok Kumar vs The State of Bihar. Patna High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

Whether the Court should direct the District Magistrate to decide the petitioner’s pending appeal against cancellation of his fair-price-shop licence

The court held

The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the District Magistrate to pass an appropriate order in Supply Appeal No. 77 of 2020 within two months of receipt or production of the order, after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

It also directed

The petitioner was permitted to raise all grounds before the appellate authority, which was directed to consider the contention concerning charges for which no show-cause notice was issued.

01Facts

The petitioner held a fair-price-shop licence under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. Following a complaint that a consumer had not received free foodgrains, the Block Supply Officer inspected the shop and submitted a report. The Sub-Divisional Officer issued a show-cause notice, received the petitioner’s reply, and cancelled the licence by order dated 7 November 2020.

p. 2 · ¶ 2

The petitioner appealed to the District Magistrate in Supply Appeal No. 77 of 2020, which remained pending. He contended that additional charges relied on for cancellation had not been included in the show-cause notice.

p. 3 · ¶ 3

02Issues

i.Whether the Court should direct the District Magistrate to decide the petitioner’s pending appeal against cancellation of his fair-price-shop licence

p. 4 · ¶ 5

ii.Whether the appellate authority should consider the petitioner’s contention that charges relied on in cancelling the licence were not covered by the show-cause notice

p. 4 · ¶ 5

03Law Applied

The licence was governed by the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, as identified in the relief sought.

p. 2 · ¶ 1

The Court did not interpret a specific provision of that Order or cite any precedent.

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the petitioner’s appeal had been pending before the District Magistrate since 2020. Rather than adjudicating the legality of the cancellation order in the writ proceeding, it directed the appellate authority to decide the appeal within a fixed period after hearing the petitioner.

p. 4 · ¶ 5

The authority was specifically required to consider the petitioner’s contention regarding the charges and the absence of show-cause notice in respect of them.

p. 4 · ¶ 5

05Holding

The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the District Magistrate to pass an appropriate order in Supply Appeal No. 77 of 2020 within two months of receipt or production of the order, after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

p. 4 · ¶ 5

The petitioner was permitted to raise all grounds before the appellate authority, which was directed to consider the contention concerning charges for which no show-cause notice was issued.

p. 4 · ¶ 6
Patna High Court

Original Court PDF

Ashok KumarvsThe State of Bihar

Patna High Court · October 28, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment