Ram Janam Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8671 of 2024 ====================================================== Ram Janam Ray Son of Ram Sevak Ray Resident of Village- Uttari Dhamaon, PO and PS- Samastipur, Dist. Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supplies, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Department of food and Civil Supplies, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Magistrate, Samastipur.

4.

The District Cooperative Officer, Samastipur. 5.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Patori, Samastipur. 6.

The Block Supply Officer, Patori, Samastipur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shilpi Keshri For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Standing Counsel (18) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-11-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties concerned.

2. The petitioner's PDS licence was cancelled by the Licensing Authority vide Order No. 907, dated 13.06.2018, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Patori, on the ground that the petitioner was found indulging in black-marketing of food grains.

3. The petitioner challenged the order of the Licensing Authority in appeal, bearing Appeal No. 187 of 2018, before the District Magistrate, Samastipur, who after

Patna High Court CWJC No.8671 of 2024(8) dt.07-11-2025 2/3 considering all the fact, dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner vide order, dated 02.02.2021.

4. The petitioner, instead of preferring statutory revision before the Divisional Commissioner under Rule 32 (vi) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, has filed the present writ application.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that copy of the enquiry conducted by the Block Supply Officer, Patori, Samastipur, has not bee furnished to the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the State submits that the licensing authority, based upon the materials produced by the official-respondent/s, has arrived at the findings that the petitioner failed to produce any document or evidence to show the supply of food grains to real beneficiaries.

7. Be that as it may, since there is statutory provision of revision under Rule 32 (vi) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, this Court feels it expedient to dispose the writ application with liberty to the petitioner to file a revision before the Divisional Commissioner for redressal of his grievance.

8. With the aforesaid observation and directions, this writ application stands disposed.

Patna High Court CWJC No.8671 of 2024(8) dt.07-11-2025 3/3

9. It is made clear that if a revision is filed by the petitioner within a period of one month, the Divisional Commissioner shall dispose the same expeditiously in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of filing of the revision after granting due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) ashwani/- U