A breach of natural justice due to non-service of notices invalidates administrative actions unless an alternative statutory remedy exists, which the petitioner must pursue.

JUDGMENT :

G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

1. The writ petition is filed for the following reliefs:

“(i) For quashing the order dated 29-08-2017 (Annexure-1) passed by the sub Divisional Officer, Hajipur by which the P.D.S. licence No. 08/2013 of the petitioner has illegally been cancelled without adhering to the principles of Natural Justice before passing the order and without serving the copy of complaint petition, copy of show cause notice, copy of enquiry report of respondent Nos. 5,6 and copy of order of respondent No. 4 to reply and contradict against the allegations which are mandatory under law/rule.

(ii) For issuance of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to restore the licence of the petitioner to its original position and allow him to run the shop as usual

(iii) For issuance of any other order/ orders, direction/directions for which the petitioner is entitled under the facts and circumstances of this case.”

2. The brief facts culled out of the Writ petition is that the petitioner was granted P.D.S. Licence No. 08/2013, to operate as a Fair Price Shop (FPS) dealer, in Birpur Panchayat and has been functioning without any prior complaints or violations.

3. It is submitted that by order dated29.08.2017 (Annexure-1), the Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO), Hajipur, cancelled the petitioner’s licence on the following grounds of Non-reply to show cause notices dated 21.01.2016 and 01.02.2016; Findings in the inquiry report dated 26.04.2017, alleging non-distribution of grains and kerosene oil from November 2016 to January 2017, and disinterest shown in running the FPS.

4. It is further submitted that the petitioner was never served with the aforesaid show cause notices, inquiry report, or any complaint, and thus was deprived of an opportunity to respond. It is submitted that the proceeding suffered from violation of Clause 27(ii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 as well as Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

5. The petitioner further submits that the cancellation proceedings initiated on 19.12.2015 were concluded only after 20 months, contrary to Clause 27(iii) of the Order, which mandates disposal within two months.

6. In support of the case of the petitioner, reliance is placed on judgments in Satwati Deswal v. State of Haryana [(2010) 1 SCC 126], Sri Niwas Choubey v. State of Bihar [ 2015(2) PLJR 376 ], and Smt. Fulpati Devi v. State of Bihar [ 2013(1) PLJR 718 ] to contend that violation of principles of natural justice justifies the exercise of writ jurisdiction.

7. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no evidence of actual service of notice was produced by the respondents and mere annexing of documents in counter affidavit cannot cure procedural defects.

8. It is further submitted that since the cancellation order was passed in breach of natural justice, the petitioner was contained to approach this Hon’ble Court directly without exhausting the alternative remedy of appeal.

9. A detailed counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and 7 stating therein that a joint inspection report was submitted on 19.12.2015 and based on that show cause notices were issued to the petitioner vide Memo No. 80 dated 21.01.2016 and Memo No. 113 dated01.02.2016 by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Hajipur.

10. The Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner failed to respond to t