Yoginda Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2022 of 2019 ====================================================== Yoginda Devi W/o Sudarshan Giri Vill.-Singhpur, P.o.-Sahdigri, Gram Panchayat Raj- Pagara, Block-Vijaipur, P.s.-Vijaipur, Distt.-Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and Consumer Protection, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Principal Secretary Department of Food and Consumer Protection, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.

The Collector-cum-District Magistrate Gopalganj 4.

The Senior Deputy Collector Gopalganj 5.

The District Supply Officer Gopalganj 6.

The Sub Divisional Officer Hathua, Distt.- Gopalganj 7.

The Block Supply Officer Vijaipur, Distt.- Gopalganj ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey For the Respondent/s :

Mr.S.Raza Ahmad (AAG5) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 25-03-2019 Learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State submit that the writ application may be disposed of in terms of the order dated 25.01.2019 passed in CWJC No. 1394/2019 with only variation in the Memo number and the Annexure of the impugned order.

As jointly prayed for, let this writ application be also disposed of in the same terms.

The operative part of the order dated 25.01.2019 reads as under:

"In result, the impugned order, as contained in

Patna High Court CWJC No.2022 of 2019(2) dt.25-03-2019 2/2 Annexure-7 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Hathua (respondent no.6) for fresh consideration and to pass a speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Let the whole exercise be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

In case, the licensing authority is satisfied with the reply of the petitioner, the consequential benefits shall also be granted to the petitioner."

In the present case, the impugned order is Annexure6, therefore the aforesaid part of the order be read as being impugned order is Annexure-6. Rest of the order shall remain intact.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U