IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-31779-2025(O&M)

Date of Decision:29.10.2025 Harjinder Kaur ....Petitioner(s)

Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI Present: Mr. Sukhandeep Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Shruti, AAG, Punjab.

****

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for setting aside the impugned suspension order dated 31.12.2024 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No.3, with a further prayer to direct the respondents to restore the supply of ration depot situated at village Maholi Kalan, District Sangrur, Punjab, which has been suspended/attached to another ration depot.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a licence holder of distribution of foodgrains under the Punjab Targeted Public Distribution System (Licensing & Control) Order, 2016 and had been distributing foodgrains to the villagers from time to time.However, vide Annexure P-2, a show-cause notice dated 23.12.2024 was issued to the petitioner by the District Controller, Food Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Malerkotla, in which it was so stated that various complaints have been registered against her through the testimony by the Assistant Controller, Ahmedgarh as well as other ration depot card holders on the charges of supplying less than the stipulated quantity of wheat. He submitted that however in the aforesaid show-cause notice, it was also mentioned that the petitioner was to reply within a period of two days, which was a very short period of time. He submitted that the petitioner received the show-cause notice well in time but the documents pertaining to the complaints against her were never supplied alongwith the aforesaid show-cause notice and it was by way of the impugned order dated 31.12.2024 (Annexure P-3), which was passed after about 8 days that her authorization/licence was suspended with immediate effect. He submitted that as per the aforesaid control order, the action for suspension of licence can be taken under Rule 15 of the Punjab Targeted Public Distribution System (Licensing & Control) Order, 2016, in which the District Magistrate can suspend the licence with regard to only that commodity in which the contravention has been made, whereas the suspension has taken place in total and therefore, it is violative of the aforesaid provisions.

3. He further submitted that apart from the above, there is rather a Standard Operating Procedure which has been issued by the Director, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Punjab, vide Annexure P-4 dated 21.09.2023 and while referring to para No.4 of the aforesaid Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), he submitted that where the licensing authority decides to suspend or suspends the FPS after the personal hearing, the licensing authority must take a final decision on the matter by issuing a detailed speaking order within a period of 90 days from the date of issuance of suspension order and also referred to para No.5, which provides that the licensing authority shall ensure that reasonable opportunity has been given to the licensee before taking any decision regarding suspension/cancellation of his license, as the case may be. He submitted that in this way, there had been a contravention of the aforesaid SOP, which was issued by the Director, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Punjab because only two days notice was given to the petitioner and apart from the above, 90 days have already expired after the suspension was ordered on 31.12.2024 but still the final decision has not been taken on the complaints and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and quashed.

4. On the other hand, Ms. Shruti, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has submitted that she has received an