Patna High CourtCWJC/11664/2015dismissed

Vina Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-08-14Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

Patna High Court CWJC No.11664 of 2015 dt.14-08-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11664 of 2015 =========================================================== Vina Devi wife of Bhuletan Ram, resident of Mohalla- Dhanupra, P.S.- Arrah Town, District- Bhojpur (Arrah) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

2. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur (Arrah)

3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Arrah Sadar, District Bhojpur (Arrah)

4. District Supply Officer, Bhojpur, Arrah

5. Block Supply Officer, Arrah, District- Bhojpur

6. Marketing Officer, Arrah Sadar, District- Bhojpur (Arrah) .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr. GA9- ANIL KUMAR SINHA =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 14-08-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to make allotment in favour of the petitioner's PDS licence No. 67/94 (old)/137 of 2007 (new).

2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite repeated calls.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents invites reference to para 13 of the counter affidavit wherein it has been stated that the PDS licence of the petitioner stood cancelled on 15.07.2015 (Annexure-R/2). It is submitted that such cancellation order was passed prior to filing of the writ petition, but the same has not been challenged. As such the question of restoration of supplies to the petitioner does not arise.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11664 of 2015 dt.14-08-2018

4. Having regard to the stand of the respondents, this Court finds the writ petition to be devoid of merit. If the PDS licence of the petitioner was cancelled on 15.07.2015, prior to filing of the writ petition, the question of restoring supplies to the petitioner does not arise. The cancellation order has fairly been passed after calling for a show cause from the petitioner. The stand in the counter affidavit has not been controverted and no rejoinder thereto has been filed by the petitioner.

5. The writ petition accordingly stands dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/Md. Ibrarul AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 17.08.2018 Transmission Date NA