Navin Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18217 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Navin Prasad Singh son of Late Chhotan Singh, resident of Village and P.O.- Lohan, P.S.- Ariyari, Distt- Sheikhpura, at present holding the post of Chairman of Loan Prathamik Krishi Sakh Sahyog Samiti Ltd. Lohan, Block- Chewara (Sheikhpura) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation Ltd., Bihar, Patna

2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation Ltd., Head Office- Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Sheikhpura

4. The District Manager, Lakhisarai/Sheikhpura

5. The District Co-operative Officer, Sheikhpura/Lakhisarai

6. The Block Agriculture Officer, Block- Chewara, Distt- Lakhisarai .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent-State: Mr. Rajesh Kumar A.C. to AAG 3 For the BSFC : Mr. A.N.Rai, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 04-02-2016 The limited grievance raised by the petitioner who happens to be the Chairman of the Lohan Primary Agricultural Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Block Chewara in the district of Sheikhpura is that of the 4800 quintal of supply of paddy made by the society to the respondent Corporation he has been paid the price in respect of 3180 quintals of paddy while 951 quintals of paddy has been returned back to the petitioner but no steps has been taken by the Corporation either to return the balance paddy of 669 or to make payment of the price thereof. The matter relates to Khariff Marketing Season 2011-12.

Mr. Ram Niwash Prasad learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CWJC No.18217 of 2014 (2) dt.04-02-2016 2/2 with reference to Annexure-7 which is a letter of the District Manager, Lakhisarai addressed to the Deputy Chief (Finance) of the Corporation submits that the grievance of the petitioner has been noted but no follow up action has been taken. Learned counsel has also relied upon the purchase vouchers annexed at Annexure -1 series to support his submission. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of grievance raised herein, I deem it fit and proper to dispose of the writ petition with a liberty to the petitioner to raise his grievance before the District Manager, Lakhisarai/ Sheikhpura respondent No.

4 along with the supportive documents and who shall consider the grievance of the petitioner and dispose of the same in accordance with law and after opportunity of hearing to the petitioner expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It goes without saying that if the claim of the petitioner is upheld then the necessary payment be made within a fortnight from such disposal, however, in case, the claim is not upheld then the same should be disposed of by speaking order to be passed within the same period.

The writ petition is disposed of.

Bibhash/- (Jyoti Saran, J) U