Patna High CourtCWJC/10863/2013disposed

Ajay Kumar Karn v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-08-14Mr. Justice Samarendra Pratap Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10863 of 2013 ====================================================== Ajay Kumar Karn, son of Late Baidyanath Lal Karn, resident of VillageKetuka, P.O.- Bariaul, P.S.- Sadar, District- Darbhanga .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Food and Supply Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Darbhanga

3. The District Magistrate, Darbhanga

4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Darbhanga

5. The District Supply Officer, Darbhanga

6. The Marketing Officer, Darbhanga

7. The Block Development Officer, Darbhanga

8. The Block Supply Officer, Darbhanga .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Karn, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. R. N. Chaubey, AAG-12 ======================================================

CORAM:

HONOURABLE MR.

JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-08-2015 The petitioner is a P.D.S. dealer under Siso Pachimi panchayat under Darbhanga Block in the district of Darbhanga.

2. The petitioner had earlier moved this Court for quashing letter no. 1311 dated 11.07.2011 issued by the Block Development Officer, Darbhanga whereby he was directed to deposit the value of undistributed rice given to him under SGRY Scheme. The writ petition was disposed of on 20.09.2011 with a direction to file his representation before the Block Development Officer, Darbhanga (Sadar). After hearing the petitioner, the Block Development Officer (Sadar) Darbhanga has finally raised a Bill of Rs. 3,71,961/-.

Patna High Court CWJC No.10863 of 2013 (2) dt.14-08-2015 2 / 2

3. The petitioner submits that notwithstanding he is not legally liable to pay the said amount, he is willing to pay the entire amount in 12 equal installments to avoid any future complication, as he does not have the sufficient means to pay the entire amount at a time.

4. In view of the facts of the case, the prayer made by the petitioner is accepted. The petitioner would pay the balance amount in 12 equal installments. The 1st installment would be paid by 10th September, 2015. In view of the assurance of the petitioner, no coercive steps would be taken against the petitioner, which would be subject to fulfilling his part of the undertaking.

5. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.) Uday/- U