Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8937 of 2019 ====================================================== Santosh Kumar Son of Shatrudhan Singh Resident of Village Basdiha Kalan,P.O.

and P.s.

Phesar,Gram Panchayat-Phesar,BlockAurangabad,Dist.Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through The Principal Secretary,Department of Food and Consumer protection,Govt. of Bihar,Patna 2.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Food and Consumer protection, Govt. of Bihar,Patna 3.

The Officer on Special Duty, Department of Food and Consumer protection,Govt. of Bihar,Patna 4.

The Commissioner, Magadh Division,at Gaya 5.

The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Aurangabad 6.

The District Supply Officer, Aurangabad 7.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sub Division-Aurangabad,Dist.-Aurangabad 8.

Shailendra Kumar Singh Son of Suresh Singh Resident of VillageGamahari,P.O. and P.S. Phesar,Dist.-Aurangabad 9.

Sri Vardhan Kumar Son of Balram Pathak Resident of Village-Basdiha,P.O. Aurangabad,P.s. Aurangabad,Dist.-Aurangabad ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey No.5 For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Upendra Pratap Singh, AC to SC4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR) 23-11-2022 After some arguments, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey No.5, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees for referring the matter to the Divisional Commissioner, Gaya for resolution of the dispute raised by him.

In view of the notification dated 21.07.2022 issued by

Patna High Court CWJC No.8937 of 2019(2) dt.23-11-2022 2/2 the Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Sections 3 and 5 of the 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 Nos. 8 and 9, 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 Nos. 8 and 9.

We have specifically asked Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 to be heard by the Divisional Commissioner as the present order is being passed in his absence.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) ( Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) rishi/- U