Patna High CourtCWJC/3188/2015dismissed

Ravindra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-11-07Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

Patna High Court CWJC No.3188 of 2015 dt.07-11-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3188 of 2015 =========================================================== Ravindra Kumar S/o Late Basudeo Gope, Resident of Village - Karai Persurai, P.S. - Karai Persurai, District - Nalanda.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Nalanda at Biharsharif.

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Hilsa, Nalanda.

4. The Executive Officer, Hilsa, Nalanda.

5. The Block Supply Officer, Hilsa, Nalanda.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Raj Kishore Prasad, Mr. Bishwa Bijay Kumar, Advocates.

For the Respondents : Mr. Manish Kumar, AC to AAG-6 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 07-11-2017 The present writ petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 20.08.20013 passed by the District Magistrate-cumCollector, Nalanda at Biharsharif (respondent no. 2) in Supply Appeal No. 61 of 2006 as well as order dated 22.04.2006 in Memo No. 07/Mu passed by S.D.O. Hilsa who had initially suspended the licence of the petitioner containing Licence No. 03/85; and for connected reliefs.

2. At the very outset, this Court takes note that remedy by way of revision before the Divisional Commissioner is available to the petitioner against the impugned order passed in Supply Appeal No. 61 of 2006, which has not been availed of by the petitioner.

3. In view of availability of the alternative remedy as

Patna High Court CWJC No.3188 of 2015 dt.07-11-2017 above, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition before the Divisional Commissioner for redressal of his grievances.

4. It is made clear that in case such a revision petition 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) Md. Ibrarul/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 13.11.2017 Transmission Date N.A.