Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3016 (JHR)

FIROZ ANSARI v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

WPC/6666/2012 · 2026-04-07

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:9696 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 6666 of 2012 Firoz Ansari, son of late Noor Mohammad Ansari, resident of village Bajpur, P.S. Ratu, P.S. Guru, District-Ranchi ……………Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Food & Civil Supply, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi 2. The Principal Secretary, Food & Civil Supply, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, having its office near Civil Court, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S. Sadar, District-Ranchi 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Ranchi having its office near Civil Court, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S. Sadar, District-Ranchi, ...... … Respondents -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Miss. Apurva, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar, G.A-III 10/ 07.04.2026: Heard Miss Apurva, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned G.A-III, appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. 2. This petition has been filed for under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 11.10.2012 by which the P.D.S licence of the petitioner has been cancelled by the respondent no.4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner namely, late Noor Mohammad Ansari was provided licence in the year, 1988 who died leaving behind the petitioner and other family member dependent on him after continuing the shop for more than 20 years. She draws the attention of the court to letter dated 10.12.1996 and 14.10.1998 contained in Annexure-1 and 2 of the petition and submits that then the Government of Bihar by the said letter decided to grant license to the dependent of licensee, if the licensee died after running the shop of public distribution system for eight years. By way of referring the letter dated ( 2026:JHHC:9696 ) 2 10.04.2006 contained in Annexure-3 of the writ petition she submits that the Government of Jharkhand after creation of Jharkhand put embargo on issuance of new license, however issued instruction to concerned authority to issue license on compassionate ground after following the process. She further submits that in the light of aforesaid decision the petitioner was granted license on compassionate ground in view of annexure-4 of the writ petition. She further submits that however by order dated 20.03.2012 the respondent no.4 cancelled the license of the petitioner. She submits that the said order was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 1821 of 2012 and the said writ petition was allowed by order dated 17.07.2012 quashing the order dated 20.03.2012 and liberty was provided to the respondents to proceed in accordance with law. She next submits that thereafter the status of license of the petitioner was restored by order dated 22.09.2012 however, the petitioner was not allowed to collect article and distribute the same. She further submits that was only eye wash and the petitioner was restricted not to distribute any article and thereafter the petitioner again received show cause by letter dated 22.09.2012 as to why the license of the petitioner should not be cancelled. She submits that by the impugned order on the basis of resolution no. 1580 dated 06.08.2009 the license of the petitioner has been cancelled only on the ground that BPL, Women Self Help Groups can be granted license on the compassionate ground. She further submits that the said resolution dated 06.08.2009 is not debarring other compassionate allotment of license and inspite of that in absence of any cogent reason, the said order has been passed. She submits that there is no illegality done by the petitioner in the light of Clause 11 of Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984, license cannot be cancelled or suspended if there is no violation of Clause-11 is made by the petitioner. On ( 2026:JHHC:9696 ) 3 these grounds, she submits that this writ petition may kindly be allowed. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned G.A-II appearing on behalf of the respondent-State opposes the prayer and submits that petitioner is having alternative remedy by way of filing the appeal before the Deputy Commissioner. He submits that the license of the petitioner has been cancelled in the light of resolution no. 1580 dated 06.08.2009 wherein only BPL, Women Self Help Groups can be granted license and in view of that the license of the petitioner has been cancelled as such there is no illegality in the impugned order and this writ petition is fit to be dismissed. 5. There is no doubt that if any alternative remedy is there the High Court sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India restraining to exercise the discretionary power however this writ petition is of the year, 2012 and already entertained and several orders have been passed, the Court finds that at this stage remand back the matter to the appellate authority will not be justified. 6. Admittedly, the father of the petitioner was provided PDS license in the year, 1988. He has run that shop for more than 20 years. Subsequently, he has died and pursuant to letter dated 10.04.2006 the petitioner was provided license on compassionate ground and further the said license was cancelled inspite of any cogent reason which was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.(C) 1821 of 2012 and the said writ petition was allowed by order dated 17.07.2012 by way of quashing the order dated 20.03.2012. Thereafter, the status of license of the petitioner was restored by order dated 22.09.2012 however, the petitioner was not allowed to withdraw any article and distribute the same. Subsequently, the petitioner was show- caused and thereafter the petitioner filed reply to the show cause and only on the ground of Resolution Dated 1580 dated 06.08.2009 saying that only ( 2026:JHHC:9696 ) 4 BPL, Women Self Help Groups can be granted license, the license of the petitioner has been cancelled. In the said Resolution dated 1580 dated 06.08.2009 there is no provision to cancel any allotment to other person prior to issuing of said letter. Prima facie it appears that the said resolution is restricted to only BPL, Women Self Help Groups members that is not restricting for compassionate appointment and in view of that it transpires that the said resolution has been wrongly applied by the authorities. So far the case of the petitioner is concerned, further Clause 11 of Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984 suspension and cancellation of license can be made once any contravention of any terms and conditions of the license has been made by the licensee. There is no reason assigned in the impugned order what terms and conditions and contravention has been made by the petitioner and in view of that also the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 11.10.2012 passed by the respondent no.4 is hereby quashed. The license of PDS shop of the petitioner is restored. 7. In view of above facts, reasons and analysis this writ petition is allowed and disposed of in above terms. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of. Dt.07.04.2026 Satyarthi/- ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)