Smt. Veena Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6557 of 2016 ====================================================== Smt. Veena Singh, W/o Bansilal Singh, proprietor of M/s Maa Sarswati Rice Mill, residence of Village- Kama Bigha, Aurangabad, P.S.- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through its Secretary, Department of Food & Civil Supplies, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Secretary, Food & Civil Supplies, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad.

4. The Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, Sone Bhawan Veer Chand Patel Path, through its C.M.D., Patna.

5. The Managing Director, Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, Sone Bhawan, Veer Chand Patel Path, Patna.

6. The District Manager, State Food Corporation, Aurangabad, DistrictAurangabad. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Naresh Dikshit Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary For the Respondent-State : Mr. Chandra Shekhar Singh, AC to GP-16 For the Respondent-BSFC : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 23-06-2016 Heard Mr. Naresh Dikshit, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, counsel for the State and Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation. Although a number of reliefs have been prayed in the writ petition which is bordering on contractual dispute, the reliance placed by Mr. Dikshit on the letter dated 16.3.2015 of the Managing Director addressed to the District Manager, State Food Corporation, Aurangabad to establish the grievance of the petitioner, is misconceived for it is issued one year back on

Patna High Court CWJC No.6557 of 2016 (2) dt.23-06-2016 16.3.2015 and although the Managing Director of the Corporation has granted certain consideration in favour of the petitioner and Mr. Dikshit endeavours to submit that the petitioner has discharged her part of obligation by depositing the required dues for entering into an agreement but there is nothing on record to show whether the grievance raised herein was raised by the petitioner before the Managing Director as to the non-compliance of his directives or there was any request made before the District Manager concerned in the light of the directives of the Managing Director of the Corporation.. In the circumstances discussed and considering that marketing season 2013-14 is long over, the issue raised is rendered stale. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- U