Patna High CourtCWJC/1762/2017disposed

Nand Kishor Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-05-03Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1762 of 2017 =========================================================== Nand Kishor Prasad, Son of Late Mosadi Prasad, resident of Village Sagar, P.S.: Pipra, P.O. Sagar, District- East Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Chakia, East Champaran.

4. The Block Supply Officer, Chakia, East Champaran. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Ms. Rajani Kumari, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Santosh Kumar Mishra, AC to GP9 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 03-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 18.11.2016 passed by the District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari in P.D.S. Appeal No. 10 of 2015 filed by the petitioner whereby and whereunder the District Magistrate dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order of the S.D.O., Chakia contained in Memo no. 685 dated 11.06.2015 by which the licence of P.D.S. No. 50 of 2007 of the petitioner has been cancelled.

3. At the very outset, this Court takes note that remedy by way of revision before the Divisional Commissioner is available to the petitioner against the order dated 18.11.2016 passed by the District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari in P.D.S. Appeal No. 10

Patna High Court CWJC No.1762 of 2017 dt.03-05-2018 2/2 of 2015, which has not been availed of by the petitioner.

4. In view of availability of the alternative remedy as above, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition before the Divisional Commissioner for redressal of his grievances.

5. It is made clear that in case such a revision petition is filed, the concerned authority would have regard to the present proceeding being pursued by the petitioner, while considering any issue relating to condonation of delay, if applicable. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 07.05.2018 Transmission Date N.A.