IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.3999 of 2024 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India)

Sanjulata Pradhan ....... Petitioner -Versus-

State of Odisha & others ....... Opposite Parties Advocate for the parties For Petitioner : Mr. H. Mohanty, Advocate For Opposite Parties : Ms. S. Devi, Addl. Standing Counsel ----------------------------

CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date of Hearing & Judgment: 07.01.2025 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

S.K. Mishra, J. This Writ Petition has been preferred by the Petitioner challenging the order dated Nil, as at Annexure-8, on the ground that, though the said order was passed pursuant to order dated 17.02.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.29404 of 2021, but the same is an incomplete order and was never communicated to the Petitioner. Only after receiving a copy of letter dated 02.11.2023 addressed to the Office of the learned Advocate General, Odisha and knowing about passing of the order of cancellation of P.D.S. license of the Petitioner by the Opposite Party No.2, the Petitioner applied for the certified copy of the said order. On receiving the certified copy of the so called order, the Petitioner preferred the present Writ Petition as the said order is incomplete and it neither indicates the reason so also the fact of cancellation of the P.D.S. license of the Petitioner nor bears the signature of the Licensing Authority so also the date of passing of such order.

2. The brief facts which led to filing of the Writ Petition are that, the Additional District Magistrate (Opposite Party No.2) floated an advertisement inviting applications for selection, appointment of retailer under Public Distribution System, for the area Sector-5, Rourkela, with reservation for ladies in the Year 1996. The Petitioner being eligible, to maintain livelihood of her family, applied for the same. As she satisfied all the terms and conditions of the advertisement, an order of appointment was issued in her favour on 20.02.1996 for distribution of commodities under Public Distribution System, which has been regularly renewed from year to year till date. The Petitioner continued to serve as a retailer dealing with Wheat, Rice and Kerosene under the Public Distribution System for the area Sector-5, Rourkela without violating any terms and conditions of the license of the Odisha Public Distribution (Control) Order, 2016, shortly hereinafter ‘Control Order, 2016’, under which she has been governed, nor she has been issued with any show cause for enquiry against her in last 26 years. Further, the Officer under Opposite Party No.2 also recorded satisfaction in dealing with the commodities by the Petitioner and no irregularity or illegality has been found against the Petitioner.

3. While the matter stood thus, on 01.04.2020, when the Petitioner was discharging her duties to supply Rice and Wheat at the doorstep of the consumers as per the direction of the Opposite Party No.2, maintaining the Covid Guidelines so also endorsing the sale in the cards of the consumers, suddenly, she was called by the Asst. Civil Supply Officer, namely Ramchandra Tudu to report at her shop. Thereafter, the Petitioner and her son found a large number of people, Supply Officer, Executive Magistrate etc. are questioning about a Tempo said to have been seized with 10 Quintals of Rice, which the Petitioner has got nothing to do with the rice or Tempo, as her stock is up-to-date and accurate as per the materials received and sale to the consumers without any infirmity in her stock or in any manner regarding the terms and conditions of the license as well as the Control Order, 2016.

4. However, an order of suspension of the retail license was issued against the Petitioner on the very next date i.e. on 02.04.2020, by the Opposite Party No.2 with a direction