Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Limited Permissive Use Confers No Right to Expand Trademark Beyond Agreed Territories: Bombay High Court Enforces Consent Decree in ‘New Indian Express’ Trademark Dispute Assam Rifles Not Entitled to Parity with Indian Army Merely Due to Similar Duties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Equal Pay Petition Conspiracy Cannot Be Presumed from Illicit Relationship: Bombay High Court Acquits Wife, Affirms Conviction of Paramour in Murder Case Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Cannot Be Granted Without Satisfying Twin Conditions of Section 37: Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Orders Terming Them ‘Perversely Illegal’ Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act MBA Degree Doesn’t Feed the Stomach: Delhi High Court Says Wife’s Qualification No Ground to Deny Maintenance POCSO Presumption Is Not a Dead Letter, But ‘Sterling Witness’ Test Still Governs Conviction: Bombay High Court High Courts Cannot Routinely Entertain Contempt Petitions Beyond One Year: Madras High Court Declines Contempt Plea Filed After Four Years Courts Cannot Reject Suit by Weighing Evidence at Threshold: Delhi High Court Restores Discrimination Suit by Indian Staff Against Italian Embassy Improvised Testimonies and Dubious Recovery Cannot Sustain Murder Conviction: Allahabad High Court Acquits Two In Murder Case Sale with Repurchase Condition is Not a Mortgage: Bombay High Court Reverses Redemption Decree After 27-Year Delay Second Transfer Application on Same Grounds is Not Maintainable: Punjab & Haryana High Court Clarifies Legal Position under Section 24 CPC Custodial Interrogation Is Not Punitive — Arrest Cannot Be Used as a Tool to Humiliate in Corporate Offence Allegations: Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Partnership Act | Eviction Suit by Unregistered Firm Maintainable if Based on Statutory Right: Madhya Pradesh High Court Reasonable Grounds Under Section 37 of NDPS Act Cannot Be Equated with Proof; They Must Reflect More Than Suspicion, But Less Than Conviction: J&K HC Apprehension to Life Is a Just Ground for Transfer When Roots Lie in History of Ideological Violence: Bombay High Court Transfers Defamation Suits Against Hamid Dabholkar, Nikhil Wagle From Goa to Maharashtra

“Non-Supply of Enquiry Report is Fatal”: Patna High Court Quashes License Cancellation in Fair Price Shop

05 September 2024 12:32 PM

By: sayum


In a significant judgment, the Patna High Court has set aside the cancellation of a fair price shop license and the subsequent rejection of appeals by the petitioner, Sukhnandan Chaudhary. The court, presided over by Justice A. Abhishek Reddy, emphasized the necessity of adhering to procedural requirements and principles of natural justice, particularly the need to provide an enquiry report alongside a show-cause notice, as mandated by the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.

The petitioner, Sukhnandan Chaudhary, had his fair price shop license canceled by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Hajipur, on March 14, 2012. Subsequent appeals to the Additional District Magistrate, Vaishali, and the Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur, were also rejected. Chaudhary challenged these orders in the Patna High Court, arguing that the cancellation was unlawful due to procedural lapses, including the failure to supply an enquiry report with the show-cause notice and the omission of a clear proposal for cancellation in the notice.

Justice A. Abhishek Reddy noted that the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner did not include the enquiry report, nor did it explicitly propose the cancellation of the license. This was deemed contrary to Rule 27(ii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. The court highlighted that these omissions violated the principles of natural justice, as the petitioner was not given adequate information to respond effectively to the notice.

The court referenced earlier judgments, particularly in CWJC No. 253 of 2014 and CWJC No. 21202 of 2021, which underscored the importance of supplying an enquiry report and mentioning the proposed action in the show-cause notice. Justice Reddy quoted, “It is mandatory for a licensing authority issuing a notice under order 27(ii) to a licensee to mention that there is a proposal for cancellation of his license, failing which such notice cannot be treated as valid.”

The court’s reasoning was grounded in the principle that any action with significant civil consequences, such as the cancellation of a license, must be preceded by a fair and transparent process. The court found that the absence of the enquiry report and the failure to explicitly propose the license cancellation in the show-cause notice deprived the petitioner of the opportunity to make a meaningful defense.

Justice Reddy observed, “The non-supply of the enquiry report and the absence of a clear proposal for cancellation in the show-cause notice are not mere procedural lapses but go to the root of the matter, affecting the fairness of the entire process.”

The Patna High Court’s judgment mandates the issuance of a fresh show-cause notice to the petitioner, ensuring compliance with the procedural requirements under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. The decision reaffirms the judiciary's commitment to upholding the principles of natural justice, particularly in administrative actions that impact individuals’ rights and livelihoods. The case has been remanded to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Hajipur, with instructions to follow due process before making any further decisions regarding the petitioner's license.

Date of Decision: September 2, 2024

Sukhnandan Chaudhary vs. The State of Bihar and Others

Latest Legal News