Patna High CourtCWJC/16411/2014disposed

Smt. Sona Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-05-09Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16411 of 2014 =========================================================== Smt. Sona Devi, Wife of Late Uday Narain Singh, resident of Gorakhshani, P.S. - Jehanabad, District - Jehanabad.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

2. The District Magistrate, Jehanabad.

3. The Licensing Authority-cum-Sub-Divisional Officer, Jehanabad.

4. The District Supply Officer, Jehanabad.

5. The Block Supply Officer, Block - Jehanabad, District - Jehanabad. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Kumar Manish, SC 21 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ application has been filed for quashing the order dated 28.12.2013 passed in Case no. 23/D.M./2013 by the District Magistrate Jehanabad whereby and whereunder he has confirmed the order contained in memo 1600 dated 31.12.2012 passed by the S.D.O. Jehanabad; for quashing the letter/memo no. 1600 dated 31.12.2012 passed by the S.D.O. Jehanabad by which the P.D.S. License of the petitioner has been cancelled with immediate effect; and for connected reliefs.

3. At the very outset, this Court takes note that remedy by way of revision before the Divisional Commissioner is available to

Patna High Court CWJC No.16411 of 2014 dt.09-05-2018 2/2 the petitioner against the impugned order dated 28.12.2013 passed in Case No. 23/D.M. /2013, which has not been availed of by the petitioner.

4. In view of availability of the alternative remedy as above, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition before the Divisional Commissioner, Gaya for redressal of her grievances.

5. It is made clear that in case such a revision petition is filed, the concerned authority would have regard to the present proceeding being pursued by the petitioner, while considering any issue relating to condonation of delay, if applicable. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NAFR Uploading Date 24.05.2018 Transmission Date N.A.