Digvijay Narayan Purushottam v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18742 of 2013 ====================================================== Digvijay Narayan Purushottam, Son of Sri Udai Shankar Prasad, resident of Village- Deoley, P.S- Shekhpura, District- Shekhpura. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Shekhpura.

4. The Sub-divisional Officer, Shekhpura.

5. The District Supply Officer, Shekhpura.

6. The Block Supply Officer, Shekhpura.

7. Kumar Nawjeevan Diwakar S/O Kumar Dharmendra @ Sri Devendra Prasad Singh, R/O Village- Lodipur, P.O- Lodipur, P.S- Shekhpura, District- Shekhpura. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saket Tiwary For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sunil Kr. Mandal ======================================================

CORAM:

HONOURABLE MR.

JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-09-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner held P.D.S. license for village Deoley. In the meantime one Kumar Nawjeevan Diwakar filed writ application, bearing C.W.J.C. No. 7106 of 2010, raising a grievance that though two dealerships have been granted for the village Deoley, but no dealership has been granted for village Lodipur. The Special Works Officer, Food and Consumer Protection Department also recommended for issuance of dealership for village Lodipur. The writ petition was disposed of on 20.09.2011 with a direction to the respondent to consider possibility of awarding a dealership at village Lodipur.

Patna High Court CWJC No.18742 of 2013 (3) dt.30-09-2015 2 / 2 It appears that respondent no.3 while allotting a dealership for village Lodipur, cancelled the dealership of the petitioner, which was for the village Deoley. The petitioner has no grievance with respect to allotment of dealership for the village Lodipur. He submits that this Court nowhere directed that the dealership of village Deoley should be cancelled. Besides this, the Lodipur Gram Panchayat is populous enough to accommodate four dealers in the Panchayat. He submits that he was merely asked to be present in a meeting in the office of District Magistrate. However, no details were provided to him in this regard.

Having regard to the facts of the case, the matter is referred to District Level Selection Committee/ licensing authority to consider whether there is possibility of 4th dealership for village Deoley. It will be open for the petitioner to make his representation in this respect.

With the aforesaid observation, this application stands disposed of.

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.) Uday/- U