Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4920 of 2020 ====================================================== Santosh Kumar Son of Dhruv Prasad, Resident of Village-Darpa Tola Sukhalahiya, P.S.-Darpa, District-East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Secretary to Govt. of Bihar, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Collector of District cum Chairman, District Selection Committee, East Champaran at Motihari.

4.

The District Supply Officer, Food and Consumer Protection Departments Office at Motihari.

5.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Raxaul, East Champaran. 6.

Alok Kumar, Son of Ram Pravesh Thakur, Resident of Village-Pipara, P.S.- Darpa, District-East Champaran.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Binay Kant Mani Tripathi, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. S.Raza Ahmad (AAG5) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR) Date : 24-11-2022 Heard Mr. Binay Kant Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner has challenged the appointment of respondent no.6 on the ground that he was way down in the merit list as compared to the petitioner.

In view of the controversy raised and also in view of the notification dated 21.07.2022 issued by the Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Sections 3 and 5 of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.4920 of 2020 dt.24-11-2022 2/2 Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with Clause-36 of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, we direct that in the event of the petitioner making a suitable representation/complaint before the concerned Divisional Commissioner within a period of 15 days, the Divisional Commissioner shall look into the matter and after hearing all the stakeholders, including Respondent No. 6, shall pass a final order within a further period of 30 days, giving reasons in support of the decision taken by him.

The order so passed by the authority shall be made available to the petitioner as well as the Respondent No. 6. We have specifically asked Respondent No. 6 to be heard by the Divisional Commissioner as the present order is being passed in his absence.

With the aforenoted observation/direction, the petition stands disposed of.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) ( Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) rishi/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 29.11.2022 Transmission Date