SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Gau) 340

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Champa Das, wife of Shri Chandra Kishor Das - Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam - Respondent
Writ Petition [Civil] no. 2873 of 2024
Decided On : 24-02-2026

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Y.S. Mannan, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. G. Bakalial, Jr. Govt. Advocate Ms. N. Choudhury, Standing Counsel, BTC

A suspended license under the Assam Public Distribution of Articles Order must have timely cancellation proceedings initiated within 90 days; otherwise, the suspension becomes invalid.

Headnote:(A) Assam Public Distribution of Articles Order, 1982 - Clause 15 - Constitution of India - Article 226 - Prolonged suspension of Sub-Wholesaler / Retailer License - The petitioner’s license was suspended without proper proceedings initiated within the stipulated 90-day period, leading to the suspension order’s invalidation. (Paras 1-24)

(B) Fair Price Shop Operations - Irregularities - The court emphasized that a license must not remain suspended beyond the limit without a show cause notice, underscoring the necessity of procedural fairness in administrative actions. (Paras 11-15)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner’s Sub-Wholesaler / Retailer License was suspended following complaints of irregularities. Despite the submission of a detailed reply and lack of a cancellation order, the license was deemed suspended based on subsequent reports.

Findings of Court:
The suspension order was invalid as no proceedings for cancellation were initiated timely, leading to the revival of the petitioner’s license.

Issues: The main issues involved whether the suspension was valid without timely proceedings and the procedural requirements regarding the license cancellation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that a suspension order loses effect if no cancellation proceedings are initiated within 90 days as per the APDA Order, reinforcing the necessity for adhering to procedural requirements.

Result: Writ petition allowed; suspension order deemed invalid, leading to revival of license.

Table of Content
1. suspension of fair price shop license context (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
2. arguments on irregularities and procedural issues (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 17)
3. procedures for suspension and cancellation of licenses (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. legality of suspension and consequences of inaction (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 22 , 23)
5. revival of fair price shop license and directions (Para 24 , 25)

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is preferred against prolonged suspension of the petitioner’s Sub-Wholesaler / Retailer License granted under the Assam Public Distribution of Articles Order, 1982 [‘the APDA Order’, for short].

2. The case projected by the petitioner and as emerges from the materials on record, in brief, is that the petitioner was granted a Sub-Wholesaler / Retailer License on 04.03.2013 under the provisions of the APDA Order. The Sub-Wholesaler / Retailer License was renewed from time to time and it was last renewed up to 31.03.2024.

3. On 30.03.2023, a public complaint was lodged by the respondent no. 4 and others as residents of Village - Siddhinathpur, Police Station – Tamulpur, District – Baksa before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Tamulpur Sub-Division making complaint about irregularities allegedly committed by the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop [FPS] licensee. On receipt of the complaint, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Tamulpur Sub-Division forwarded the complaint to the Assistant Director, In-Charge, Food, Civil Supplies & Consumers Affairs, Tamulpur on 05.04.2023 to conduct an enquiry into it by the concerned Area Inspector for submission of a report within 10.04.2023 and thereafter, to take necessary action accordingly. The Area Inspector made an enquiry on 06.04.2023 and thereafter, submitted a Report on 10.04.2023. In the Report, the Area Inspector reported that the beneficiaries made a demand to collect the Public Distribution System [PDS] articles from the nearest Fair Price Shop [FPS] dealer, Bhim Bahadur Chetry in place of the petitioner. As there was another allegation that the petitioner was a Government employee, the Area Inspector caused an enquiry on the said issue and reported that the petitioner was not a Government employee. After submission of the Report by the Area Inspector, the respondent no. 3 passed an Order on 10.04.2023 whereby the beneficiaries enlisted with the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop [FPS] were tagged with the nearest Fair Price Shop [FPS] of Bhim Bahadur Chetry of the same village, as a temporary measure, in the interest of uninterrupted supply of the PDS articles to the consumers until further order.

4. Based on the Report of the Area Inspector, the petitioner was served a Show Cause Notice dated 07.08.2023 by the Assistant Director, Food, Supplies & Consumer Affairs, Tamulpur, BTR [the respondent no. 3] asking the petitioner to show cause as to why the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop [FPS] Sub-Wholesaler / Retailer license should not be cancelled under the provisions of Clause 15[2] of the APDA Order, 1982. In the Show Cause Notice, it was mentioned that as per the Report of the Investigating Officer, the petitioner had failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the APDA Order. The petitioner was asked to submit her Reply within a period of five days from the date of receipt of the Show Cause Notice.

5. On receipt of the Show Cause Notice, the petitioner submitted her Reply to the Show Cause Notice on 11.08.2023 asserting that there was no irregularity on her part in distribution of PDS articles. The petitioner asserted that the she had been maintaining all records regarding distribution of the PDS articles and in support of her claim, she annexed all the supporting documents along with the Reply to the Show Cause Notice. Though no specific order suspending the license of the petitioner was passed, the respondent no. 3 in the Show Cause Notice dated 07.08.2023 had mentione

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top