Pratima Kumari @ Pratima Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.703 of 2019 ====================================================== 1.
Pratima Kumari @ Pratima Devi Wife of Ranjeet Kumar, Resident of Village Chainpur- P.S.- Turkauliya, Distt- East Champaran. 2.
Vandana Kumari Wife of Sachit Kumar, Resident of Village- Bankati P.STurkauliya Distt- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar Through Secretary, food and supply department, Bihar, Patna.
2.
The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari 3.
The Sub- Divisional officer, East Champaran, Motihari. 4.
The Block Supply Officer Turkauliya, Motihari. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pramod Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr.S.Raza Ahmad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 04-07-2019 The grievance of the petitioners is that as per roster in Bijulpur Panchayat two seats were available for women backward class and one seat was available for Extremely Backward Class. It is their case in the writ application that they belong to backward class, they are women and are also possessing qualification required for the grant of PDS Shop licence. However, according to the petitioners, the SubDivisional Officer, Motihari has not taken steps to fill up the vacancy against two seats for women belonging to backward class as per roster.
Learned counsel for the State has filed a counter
Patna High Court CWJC No.703 of 2019(2) dt.04-07-2019 2/3 affidavit stating therein that prior to advertisement of the vacancy the roster was prepared and the same was approved by the competent authority whereunder roster point no.481 and 483 both fell for extremely backward class and they come within the Bijulpur Panchayat of Turkauliya Block. Photocopy of the approved roster has been brought on record as Annexure 'A' to the counter affidavit. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that the document brought on record by the petitioner vide Annexure 1(A) with letter No. 134 dated 13.11.2017 is not genuine and rather manipulated. The objection of the petitioner has been found not tenable in terms of approved roster and, therefore, the same was rejected. The order disposing of the objection of the petitioner has been enclosed as shown in Annexure 'C' to the counter affidavit.
In view of the stand taken on behalf of the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they would avail their statutory remedy under the Bihar Targeted PDS (Control) Order, 2016 by filing an appropriate appeal against the order of rejection before the competent authority. Therefore, he prays to withdraw this writ application with liberty to file an appropriate appeal in accordance with law. The writ application is, thus, disposed off with liberty
Patna High Court CWJC No.703 of 2019(2) dt.04-07-2019 3/3 to the petitioners to pursue their remedies in accordance with law before the appropriate forum.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/-ved U