Manisha Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2788 of 2019 ====================================================== Manisha Kumari (Female), aged about 25 years, Wife of Sri Vijay Kumar Daughter of Sri Rajendra Sah, Resident of Aasirwad Hotel, Chandmari Chowk, Police Station-Town Police Station, District-Motihari, East Champaran Present address-Village-Bhagwanpur, Post Office-Bahlolpur, Police Station-Dhaka, District Motihari, East Champaran ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supply, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Commissioner, Trihut Division, Muzaffarpur Bihar 3.

The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari Bihar 4.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Sikarhana, Dhaka, East Champaran, Motihari Bihar 5.

The District Supply Officer, Sikarhana, Dhaka, East Champaran, Motihari Bihar 6.

The Assistant District Supply Officer, Sikarhana, Dhaka, East Champaran, Motihari Bihar 7.

The Block Supply Officer, Dhaka, East Champaran Bihar 8.

Sri Surendra Kumar Bhagat Son of Late Umesh Bhagat Resident of VillageYadour Bakhari, Post Office-Karmawa, Police Station-Dhaka, DistrictMotihari, East Champaran ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar For the Respondent/s :

Mr.S.Raza Ahmad (AAG5) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 18-06-2019 Petitioner in the present case is aggrieved by the rejection of her candidature for grant of Public Distribution System Shop license on the ground that she had submitted an incomplete form.

Referring Annexure '5' to the writ application, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the column no. 18 the Block Supply Officer has recommended against the name of the petitioner saying that '

आवेदनपत्रअपूरभराहै।' The petitioner claims that her application was complete and rejection of her

Patna High Court CWJC No.2788 of 2019(2) dt.18-06-2019 2/2 candidature has been done only to favour the respondent no. 7 who has secured lesser marks than the petitioner in his intermediate examination.

Learned counsel for the State submits that in the given facts and circumstances of the case the grievance of the petitioner may be considered by the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari to whom the petitioner seems to have submitted her application on 09.11.2018 as contained in Annexure '7' to the writ application.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, this court thinks it just and proper to direct the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari to look into the grievance of the petitioner, find out as to whether the rejection of candidature of the petitioner on the given ground is just and proper and in case it is found that the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected on trivial or frivolous ground, he would proceed to pass an appropriate order after hearing all concern including the private respondent within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. This application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U