IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2340 of 2026 ======================================================

Vishal Kumar Sinha Son of Prakash Chandra Sinha, Resident of Village-

Dhangai Bikramganj, Natvar Road, P.S.- Bikramganj, District- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Rohtas.

3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Bikramganj, District- Rohtas.

4. The District Supply Officer, Rohtas.

5. The Block Supply Officer, Bikramganj, District- Rohtas.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh, Adv.

: Mr. Ambrish Kumar, Adv.

: Mr. Saharsh Singh, Adv. : Mr. Bandana Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, Standing Counsel 9 : Mr. Yogesh Kumar, AC to SC9 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY ORAL ORDER

2 16-03-2026 Head learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief(s):-

“(i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari setting aside the impugned order bearing Memo No. 822 dated 27.09.2025 issued under the signature of Respondent No. 3 whereby and whereunder without serving the copy of the enquiry report and the documents for proposed cancellation and only relying on the enquiry report the PDS License of the petitioner has been cancelled which is in gross violation of Principle of Natural Justice as also contrary to several judicial pronouncements of this Hon’ble Court.

(ii). For direction upon the Respondents concerned to restore the PDS License of the petitioner and allow to him to lift the food grains and other articles attached to the PDS shop of the petitioner.

(iii). For any other relief/ reliefs if petitioner found entitle in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has stated that the Sub-Divisional Officer while issuing the show cause notice to the petitioner has not enclosed the enquiry report.

4. Further, learned counsel has relied on the judgment of this Hon’ble Court in CWJC No. 253 of 2014 dated 11.03.2015 wherein this Hon’ble Court has held that the non- supply of the enquiry report along with the show-cause is bad and against the principle of natural justice and equity. 5. Learned counsel has stated in view of the above mentioned provisions of law and judgment relied by the petitioner, the impugned order may be set aside and matter remanded back to the authorities concerned for furnishing a copy of the enquiry report and any other material that they seek to rely on and give an opportunity of filing his explanation and thereafter take necessary action.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has vehemently opposed the very maintainability of the writ petition and stated that the present writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy of filing an appeal before the District Magistrate. Learned counsel has therefore prayed this Hon’ble Court to dismiss the present writ petition.

7. This Court in CWJC No.253 of 2014 dated

11.03.2015 held as under:

"In my opinion, irregularities in maintenance of notice board or maintenance of the stocks within the premises of the petitioner are too trivial and cannot form a basis for cancellation of licence. No doubt there were other serious charges against the petitioner regarding non-issuance of cash-memo to the consumers, distribution of lesser amount of kerosene oil and non-distribution of food-grains but surprisingly even while making such allegations, the names of such consumers who are dissatisfied by such action of the petitioner are conspicuously missing. The allegations are sweeping in nature without reference to any specific consumer.

In my opinion the non-supply of the enquir