Administrative decisions must be based on substantial evidence, and procedural fairness requires careful consideration of credible evidence before any actions are taken.

JUDGMENT :

A. Abhishek Reddy, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Re: I.A. No. 02 of 2024.

For the reasons mentioned in the above Interlocutory Application, the same is allowed.

Registry is directed to make necessary changes.

The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

“1. That this an application for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 05.10.23 passed by the Learned Divisional Commissioner, Patna in BTPDS Control Revision No. 274/2022 whereby and whereunder the PDS licence already granted by the District level selection communittee Buxar has been directed to cancel and District Officer has been directed to take decision to pass order.

RELIEFS:-

I. The impugned order dated 05.10.2023 passed by the learned Divisional Commissioner Patna be set-aside whereby and whereunder the PDS Licence already granted in favour of petitioner has been directed to be cancelled by the district officer Buxar.

II. The Respondent No. 5 be directed to make impartial enquiry in respect of academicals certificate of the petitioner and if the same are found genuine, PDS Licence already granted, be made effective in favour of petitioner.

III. The operation of the impugned order dated 05.10.2023 passed by the Learned Divisional Commissioner Patna be stayed during pendency of this writ petition.”

3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of the order dated 05.10.2023 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Patna in Supply Revision Case No. 274/2022. The facts in brief for the purpose of disposing the present writ petition are that the petitioner was selected as a PDS license dealer by the District Level Selection Committee. That the Divisional Commissioner, Patna vide order dated 05.10.2023 has directed the District Officer, Buxar to cancel the license issued in favour of the petitioner, the Divisional Commissioner, Patna has passed the said order solely on the basis of the complaint made by the respondent No. 8 herein.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner was selected by the District Level Selection Committee after thorough scrutiny of the documents and certificates filed by him and after having found him to be eligible as per the merit list published, the petitioner was selected and was granted the PDS license. That the respondent No. 8 thereafter, filed a false complaint stating that the name of the petitioner is not Upendra Kumar but Pankaj Kumar Kamal. The authorities have called for an enquiry into the said allegation and the Sub-Divisional Officer made an extensive enquiry and submitted a report dated 04.01.2021. In the said report, it has been clearly stated that the certificates and documents issued in favour of the petitioner were found to be genuine. However, the Divisional Commissioner, Patna without adverting to the report dated 04.01.2021 of the Additional Sub-Divisional Officer, Buxar has passed the impugned order in a mechanical manner. Learned counsel has therefore, prayed this Hon’ble Court to set aside the impugned order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Patna dated 05.10.2023 and allow the present CWJC.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State and the respondent No. 8 have vehemently opposed the very maintainability of the present writ petition and stated that the petitioner has two names i.e., Upendra Kumar and Pankaj Kumar Kamal. That the authority concerned after due verification has found that the complaint made by the respondent No. 8 was genuine and passed the impugned order. Further, it is stated that the documents filed by the respondent No. 8 prove that the petition