Dharmendra Kumar Paswan @ Dharmendra Paswan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.3462 of 2018 dt.28-06-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3462 of 2018 =========================================================== Dharmendra Kumar Paswan @ Dharmendra Paswan, Son of Sri Shiv Prasad Paswan, resident of Village- Victoria Mission, Ward No. 04, Gahiri, P.S.- Nautan, Districct- West Champaran, Dealer, under Public Distribution System, Panchayat- Gahiri, Block- Nautan, District- West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar though the Principal Secretary, Food & Civil Supply Department, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Bettiah Sadar, West Champaran.

3. The District Supply Officer, West Champaran, Bettiah.

4. The Block Supply Officer, Nautan, West Champaran. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. RAZA AHMAD- AAG5 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-06-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 08.06.2010 contained in memo no. 186 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Bettiah Sadar, as also the appellate order dated 20.12.2017 passed in C.R.M. No. 05 of 2017-18 by the District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah whereby the PDS dealership of the petitioner, bearing Licence No. 01/2008-100/2016 has been cancelled.

2. 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 impugned order passed in C.R.M. No. 05 of 2017-

Patna High Court CWJC No.3462 of 2018 dt.28-06-2018 18, which has not been availed of by the petitioner.

3. 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.

4. 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) Chandran/BT AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 02.07.2018 Transmission Date NA