Udaykant Thakur, v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2895 of 2019 ====================================================== Udaykant Thakur, Son of Late Tej Narayan Thakur, Resident of VillageBhagawatpur, P.S.- Benipur, District- Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2.

The Additional Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna.

3.

The Collector, Darbhanga, District- Darbhanga. 4.

The Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Licensing Authority, Benipur, DistricctDarbhanga. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Kumar Labh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.S.Raza Ahmad (AAG5) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 19-06-2019 The petitioner, who is himself a PDS Dealer, is questioning the grant of licence to the applicants who have applied for their appointment as new PDS Dealers in Benipur Nagar Parishad pursuant to the advertisement as contained in Annexure-1 series.

In course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards the remarks in the last column no.20 at page 21 of the brief to submit that according to the remarks made there are already three vendors who are yet to be adjusted. When this Court called upon learned counsel for the petitioner to explain as to how he

Patna High Court CWJC No.2895 of 2019(2) dt.19-06-2019 2/2 may be aggrieved by the new appointments of dealers for the vacant seats, learned counsel submits that such new appointments are likely to have a cut on the number of consumers which this petitioner has.

This Court finds from the writ application that there is not even a whisper of the submission which is now being placed before this Court for satisfying the Court with regard to the locus of the petitioner to maintain this writ application. In the opinion of this Court, the attempt made by the petitioner to stop new appointments of dealers has no basis and it is more to serve his own interest than the larger public interest. In the aforesaid view of the matter, this writ application has no merit. It is dismissed accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U