Patna High CourtCWJC/7032/2015disposed

Md. Aftab Alam v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-08-18Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

Patna High Court CWJC No.7032 of 2015 dt.18-08-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7032 of 2015 ===========================================================

1. Md. Aftab Alam S/o Late Fakhrudin R/o - Bari Dargah, P.S. - Biharsharif, Dist. - Nalanda.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supply, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Biharsharif, Nalanda.

3. The District Supply Officer, Biharsharif, Nalanda.

4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Biharsharif, Nalanda.

5. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Biharsharif, Nalanda.

6. The Marketing Officer, Nagar Nigam, Biharsharif, Nalanda.

7. The Block Supply Officer, Biharsharif, Nalanda. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr. SC2- NAWAL KISHORE SINGH =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 18-08-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 28.01.2015 passed in Supply Case No. 07/2014 by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Nalanda (Respondent No. 2) as well as the order dated 10.09.2014 cancelling the petitioner's PDS licence No. 63/1985 by the Sub Divisional Officer, Biharsharif, Nalanda (Respondent No. 5); and for connected reliefs.

2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite repeated calls. Learned counsel for the respondent appears

3. Having regard to the nature of the prayer in the writ

Patna High Court CWJC No.7032 of 2015 dt.18-08-2018 petition, this Court finds that the petitioner has directly approached this Court without availing the statutory remedy by way of revision against the appellate order before the Divisional Commissioner.

4. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to prefer revision before the Divisional Commissioner, against the impugned appellate order, if so advised.

5. It is made clear that in case such a revision is filed, the concerned authority would have regard to the present proceeding being pursued by the petitioner while considering any issue relating to condonation of delay, if applicable.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/Md. Ibrarul AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 26.08.2018 Transmission Date NA