Arun Kumar v. The Food And Consumer Protection Department Through Its Principal Secretary And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11387 of 2017 ====================================================== Arun Kumar Son of Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad Singh Director of Nilkanth Chawal Mill Pvt. Ltd. Gaya, Resident of Village P.O.-Ahiyapur, P.S.-Konch, District-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Food And Consumer Protection Department Through Its Principal Secretary, Bihar at Patna 2.

The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, District-Gaya. 3.

The Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited through its M.D. Bihar at Patna.

4.

The District Manager, The Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, District-Gaya.

5.

The Deputy Chief Finance, The Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Bihar at Patna.

6.

The District Certificate Officer, Gaya, District-gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sumeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Arvind Ujjwal- Sc4 :

Mr. Shailendra Kr. Singh, Advocate :

Mr. Utkarsha Utpal, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 25-07-2025

1. The Writ petition is filed for following reliefs:- I. That the present writ application has been filed for the issuance of the appropriate writ order(s) or direction(s) in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside the order dated 06.02.2017 in which

2/4 deduction has been made with regard to jute bags for the procurement year 2012-13 of Rs.

24,81,642.72/-, Rs. 63,84,08.88/- for the procurement year 2013-14, Rs. 6,53,600/- for the procurement year 2014-15 i.e. total amount of Rs. 37,73,651.6 (Rs Thirty Seven Lakhs Seventy Three Thousand Six Hundred Fifty One Rupees and Six Paise only); on the ground that no opportunity/no notice has given by the petitioner and the order has been passed, wihtout seeking the document.

II. That the present writ application has been filed in the nature of Mandamus to decide the representation filed by the petitioner dated 30.03.2017 by the respondent authority for giving opportunity of hearing against letter dated 06.02.2017 which has been issued by Managing Director, B.S.F.C.;

III. And for the issuance of any other relief or relief(s) for which the petitioner is entitled to in the

3/4 facts and circumstances of the present case.

3. During the course of arguments, the Learned counsel for the petitioner reported that he has made a representation dated 30.03.2017 (Annexure-9), but the same was not considered by the respondent authorities and therefore, the Writ petition is filed.

4. On the other hand, the Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there is no endorsement on the said representation indicating that it was received by the respondent authorities. It is also contended by the Learned counsel for the respondent that a fresh representation may be filed by the petitioner to enable the respondents to pass appropriate orders basing on the said representation. 5.

Taking into consideration, the representation dated 30.03.2017 is not within the domain of the respondents, therefore, this Court directs the petitioner to file a fresh representation within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In turn, the

4/4 respondent authority shall also pass appropriate orders considering the merits of the case within two months from the date of receipt of this order.

6. With the aforesaid observations, the Writ petition is disposed of.

7. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) amitkr/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 29.07.2025 Transmission Date N/A