Patna High CourtCWJC/9492/2014dismissed

Chandra Deo Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-07-19Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9492 of 2014 =========================================================== Chandra Deo Sharma son of Late Ambika Sharma Resident of Village Dharaut, P.S. Makdumpur, District Jehanabad.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, Jehanabad.

2. The S.D.O., Jehanabad.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate. Mr. Vijay Anand, Advocate.

For the Respondents : Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta, AC to GP-10 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 19-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents specially respondent no. 2 to restore the license of the petitioner with immediate effect after quashing the letter dated 14.02.2014 contained in letter no. 6 issued from the office of S.D.O., Jehanabad.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's license no. 5/85 for running a P.D.S. shop was cancelled pursuant to institution of Makdumpur P.S. Case No. 53/1985. However after trial, the petitioner has been acquitted in terms of the judgment dated 09.12.1987 in Trial No. 133/1986 before the Special Judge, Gaya. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner became entitled to restoration of his P.D.S. license pursant

Patna High Court CWJC No.9492 of 2014 dt.19-07-2018 to such acquittal.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents appears and has been heard. It is submitted that there is considerable delay and laches on the part of the petitioner in seeking restoration of the license even before the authorities as evident from the minutes of the meeting of the District Selection Committee dated 13.08.2012 (Annexure-5)

5. Having regard to the inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner in seeking redressal of his grievances even after a judgment of acquittal was passed as far back in the year 1987 itself, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition stands dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/BT AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 23.07.2018 Transmission Date N.A.