Binod Das v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18471 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Binod Das S/o Late Jiyut Das Resident of Village - Dhankutwa, P.S. - Balthar, District- West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah.

2. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah.

3. The District Supply Officer, Bettiah, West Champaran.

4. The Sub Divisional Officer-cum-Licensing Authority, Narkatiaganj, District- West Champaran.

5. The Block Supply Officer, Sikta Block, Sikta, District- West Champaran.

6. The Block Development Officer, Sikta Block, Sikta, District- West Champaran.

7. Uday Bhan Singh Son of Late Kanchan Singh Dealer Under Public Distribution System, Panchayat -Dhankutwa, Block - Sikta, District- West Champaran, Resident of Village - Dhankutwa, P.S. - Balthar, District- West Champaran.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Arun Kumar Sionha , AC to GP 24 For the Respondent no. 5: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 25-08-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 29.08.2014 contained in memo no. 503 passed by the respondent no. 4 whereby and whereunder he had revived the license no. 23/2007 of the private respondent no. 7 and for connected reliefs.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner had sought for pass over of the case yesterday and once again the same prayer has been made when the matter is called out today. This Court is not

Patna High Court CWJC No.18471 of 2014 (3) dt.25-08-2018 2/2 inclined to defer the matter any longer.

3. From the pleadings in the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner is aggrieved by restoration of the PDS license of the private respondent no. 7 on the ground that he had procured his acquittal order in Balthar P.S. Case No. 26 of 2010 by causing fake witnesses to be examined in place of the petitioner and other witnesses named in the charge-sheet. It is stated in para-21 of the writ petition that an enquiry in the matter is going on.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents-State as well as the private respondent no. 7 appear and have been heard.

5. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent-State wherein the facts stated by the petitioner as above have not been denied.

6. In the above circumstances, this Court is not inclined to pass any positive order at this stage. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Sub Divisional Officer-cum-Licensing Authority, Narkatiaganj (respondent no. 4) at the appropriate stage, if the enquiry upon its conclusion results in a finding against the respondent no. 7. (Vikash Jain, J) sushma/- U