Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar Through Its Secretary,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8039 of 2021 ====================================================== Chandan Kumar son of Babulal Sah resident of village - Saheb Chapra, Police Station - Phulwaria, District- Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supply, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate, Gopalganj.

3.

The District Supply Officer, Gopalganj.

4.

The Sub divisional Officer, Gopalganj.

5.

The Sub divisional Officer, Hathua, Gopalganj. 6.

The Block Development Officer, Phulwaria, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr. S. Raza Ahmad (AAG5) Mr. Alok Ranjan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH) 11-02-2022 This application has been taken up for online hearing through video conference because of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.

The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents for consideration his case for grant of licence for PDS dealership in Phulwaria Panchayat under the district of Gopalganj.

A counter affidavit has been filed in this case stating

Patna High Court CWJC No.8039 of 2021(4) dt.11-02-2022 2/2 specifically that during the process of selection for allotment of shop under Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 {in short '(Control) Order'} the petitioner was found to be suffering from disqualification for allotment of PDS shop in view of Rule 11(iii) of the (Control) Order. The petitioner was admittedly an owner of the flour mill. This is evident from Annexure A/1 of the counter affidavit that the petitioner had admitted that he had a flour mill. In view of disqualification in terms of Rule 11(iii) of the (Control) Order, he has been denied the licence to run a PDS shop. In view of the admitted facts as noted above, we don't find any reason for this Court to interfere.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) ( Madhuresh Prasad, J) SUMIT/- U