Rifat Parveen v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11841 of 2021 ====================================================== Rifat Parveen W/o Md. Rahmatullah, Resident of Village - Harpurwa, Post - Harpurwa, P.S.- Bajpatti, District - Sitamarhi - 843314. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

The Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna. 3.

The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.

4.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Pupri at Pupri, Sitamarhi. 5.

The District Supply Officers, District Sitamarhi. 6.

The Block Development Officer, Block - Bajpatti, District - Sitamarhi. 7.

The Block Supply Officer, Block Bajpatti, District - Sitamarhi. 8.

Goldi Kumari, W/o Bhogendra Paswan, R/o village - Ward No. 12, Dhankaul, Post - Harpurwa, P.S. Bajpatti, District - Sitamarhi - 843314. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Md. Jubair Ansari, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.S Raja Ahmad ( Aag5 ) CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR) (The proceedings of the Court are being conducted through Video Conferencing and the Advocates joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residence.) Date : 11-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner has prayed for following relief:-

2/6

3/6

4/6

5/6 It is submitted on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner that District Selection Committee has illegally appointed private respondent no.8 as PDS dealer although he is at Sr. No. 1 in the merit list and he should have been granted PDS dealership.

Petitioner had filed an appeal before the District Collector against said selection giving rise to Supply Appeal Case No.53/2019 which has been dismissed by the District Magistrate ( Annexure 15) by order dated 25.2.2021 holding that since he himself is the Chairman of the District Selection

6/6 Committee, he cannot hear any appeal against the selection made by the selection committee presided over by him. As such, petitioner is granted liberty to file revision within 4 weeks before the Commissioner under Rule 32 of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 challenging the selection of respondent no.8 by the District Selection Committee as PDS dealer ignoring his claim, although he is placed at Sr. no.1 of the merit list. The Commissioner shall decide the revision filed by petitioner after hearing all the parties concerned, including respondent no.8 and shall pass a reasoned and speaking order preferably within 8 weeks from the date of filing of such revision.

With aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) Sanjay/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 11.01.2022 Transmission Date NA