Chandan Prasad, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13537 of 2019 ====================================================== Chandan Prasad, S/o Rajendra Prasad, Resident of Village- Dhorgaon, Ward No. 13, P.S.- Madhepura, District- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna.

2.

The District Level Selection Committee, Madhepura, through its Chairman. 3.

The District Magistrate, Madhepura.

4.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Madhepura.

5.

The Block Supply Officer, Madhepura, Madhepura. 6.

Bharat Ram, Son of Late Moti Ram, Resident of Village- Resident of Village- Dhorgaon, Ward No. 5, P.S.- Madhepura, District- Madhepura. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Anand, Adv.

Mr. Roop Kishan, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Arvind Ujjwal (Sc4) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 17-07-2026

1. The writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "(i) Quashing the final selection list issued under the signature of respondent nos. by which 2 to 4 the name of respondent no.6 be recommended for grant of PDS license in Dhorgaon Panchayat, Madhepura without deciding the objection filed by the petitioner on 04.09.2018 in terms of publication of

2/5 provisional merit list in the website on 01.09.2018 by which also asking an objection by the aggrieved persons on or the before.

(ii) Further the respondent be directed specially respondent no. 3 to decide the objection filed before him on 04.09.2018 by a reasoned order before grant of PDS license in Dhorgaon Panchayat.

(iii) Further be pleased to direct the competent authority to grant license in favour of the petitioner in Dhorgaon Panchayat."

2. At this juncture, the Learned counsel for the respondents contended that Section 32(iii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 provides for the provision of appeal and Section 32(vi) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 provides for the provision of revision. Section 32(iii) 32(v) and 32(vi) read as follows:

"32 (iii). Any person aggrieved by an order of the licensing authority denying the issue or renewal of the license to the fair price shop owner or

3/5 cancellation of the license may appeal to the District Officer within thirty days of the date of receipt of the order and the District Magistrate shall, as far as practicable, dispose the appeal within a period of sixty days."

32. (v) Till the disposal of appeal pending, the Appellate Authority may direct that the order under appeal shall not take effect for such period as the authority may consider necessary for giving a reasonable opportunity to the other party under sub-clause (4) or until the appeal is disposed of, whichever is earlier.

(vi) Due to non disposal of the appeal within sixty days by the District Officer or against the order passed in the appeal, a revision may be filed before the Divisional Commissioner. The revision shall be disposed of within two months.

3. Admittedly, from the reliefs prayed for in the writ petition, it is evident that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under the provisions of Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.

4/5

4. The remedy available under the Act is to prefer an appeal before the District Magistrate. As the District Magistrate is the head of the Selection Committee he cannot review his orders in an appeal. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to file a complaint/application before the Divisional Commissioner.

5. The Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that he intends to file a complaint/application before the concerned authority, but the limitation period for filing the same has lapsed. He prayed for a direction to the concerned authority to entertain the same in accordance with Section 5 of the Limitation Act. 6.

Taking into consideration that the petitioner has an alternative remedy for filing complaint/application, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file

5/5 complaint/application within one month from the date of receipt of this order before the concerned authority.

The delay in filing the complaint/application shall be condoned by the authority concerned, and the authority shall dispose of the same within three months from the date of filing of the same. It is needless to mention that before passing any order the petitioner should be given a fair opportunity of hearing.

7. With the above said observation, the Writ petition is disposed of.

8. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) Manish/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 18.07.2026.

Transmission Date