Jitendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8485 of 2019 ====================================================== Jitendra Kumar S/o Ramashish Paswan, Resident of Village-P.O.-Nakata panchayat Bariyarpur west, Block-P.s.-MotiPur, Dist-Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

The District Level Selection Committee through Its Chairman Cum Collector, Muzaffarpur.

3.

The District Supply Officer, Muzaffarpur 4.

The Sub Divisional Magistrate, West Muzaffarpur. 5.

The Block Supply Officer, Motipur.

6.

Mukesh Kumar S/o Laxman Chaudhary Resident of Village-P.O.-Nakata Panchayat Bariyarpur West, Block-P.S.-Motipur, Dist.-Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shankar Kishore Shahi, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Upendra Pratap Singh, AC to SC 4 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR) Date : 24-08-2022 Heard Mr. Shankar Kishore Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Upendra Pratap Singh for the State.

The petitioner claims to be a more suitable candidate than respondent no. 6, who has been selected as a PDS dealer.

Patna High Court CWJC No.8485 of 2019 dt.24-08-2022 2/3 It is the case of the petitioner that till the final selection of respondent no. 6, his claim was found to be better than him and was also recommended by the District Committee. However, for no apparent good reason, respondent no. 6 has been selected. Thus, the petitioner has prayed for cancellation of his license, grant of license to the petitioner and in the interregnum, stop the supply of food-grains to respondent no. 6.

In view of the controversy raised on behalf of the petitioner with respect to selection of respondent no. 6, we deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to make a suitable complaint before the Divisional Commissioner within a period of thirty days, who on receipt of such complaint, shall, after hearing all the parties including respondent no. 6, pass a final order within the next sixty days, giving reasons in support of his decision. We have particularly directed for affording hearing to respondent no. 6 before passing any final order for the reason that this order is being passed in his absence.

Patna High Court CWJC No.8485 of 2019 dt.24-08-2022 3/3 With the aforesaid direction/observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) (Jitendra Kumar, J) krishna/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 29.08.2022 Transmission Date