Gaibi Yadav vs The State Of Bihar
2025 Latest Caselaw 4172 Patna

Patna High Court

Gaibi Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 15 October, 2025

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16118 of 2019
     ======================================================
     Gaibi Yadav Son of Mithu Yadav Resident of Village- Sahia, P.S.- Jhajha,
     District- Jamui.
                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                        Versus
1.    The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer
      Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna.
2.   The District Magistrate, Jamui, District- Jamui.
3.   The Sub- Divisional Officer, Jamui, District- Jamui.
                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s   :      Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Adv.
     For the Respondent/s   :      Mr. Arvind Ujjwal (SC-4)
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

                                   ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 15-10-2025

1. The Writ petition is filed to set aside the

order dated 19.06.2019, passed by the Sub-

Divisional Officer, Jamui vide Memo No. 530, whereby

the licence of the petitioner was cancelled with

immediate effect.

2. Further relief sought is to direct the

respondents to restore the licence and to make an

allotment of the shop.

3. The brief facts, as culled out from the Writ

petition, are that the petitioner was a PDS Dealer

since 1981, holding valid Licence No. 36 of 2016. The

licensing authority issued a Show-Cause vide Memo

No. 176 dated 09.02.2019, asking about the

circumstances in which he was running the PDS Patna High Court CWJC No.16118 of 2019 dt.15-10-2025

Shop, while working as a postman. Further, the

petitioner was directed to submit his show cause

within a week, explaining why his licence should not

be cancelled.

4. In response to the show cause notice, the

petitioner submitted a detailed reply, bringing all

relevant facts on record. In spite of this, the licencing

authority cancelled his licence on the directions of

the District Magistrate without applying judicial

mind. Being aggrieved by the same, the present Writ

petition has been filed.

5. It is the specific contention of the Learned

counsel for the petitioner that he could not prefer

any appeal before the District Magistrate, as the

licence was cancelled at the instance of the District

Magistrate, who was holding the post of Chairman of

the District Selection Committee.

6. On the other hand, the Learned counsel

for the respondents contended that if the license was

cancelled, at the instance of the District Magistrate,

being part of the Selection Committee, an effective

alternative remedy is available for the petitioner to Patna High Court CWJC No.16118 of 2019 dt.15-10-2025

prefer a complaint before the Divisional

Commissioner.

7. Taking into consideration that the

petitioner has an effective alternative remedy, this

Court directs the petitioner to prefer complaint

before the Divisional Commissioner within two

months from the date of receipt of this order. The

petitioner shall raise all his grievances in the

complaint regarding the cancellation of his licence. In

turn, the Divisional Commissioner shall consider the

case on its merits and shall pass appropriate orders

within three months from the date of filing of the

complaint. It is needless to say that before passing

any order, the petitioner shall be given a fair

opportunity of hearing.

8. With the aforesaid observations, the Writ

petitions is disposed of.

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) Manish/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                N/A
Uploading Date          17.10.2025
Transmission Date