Sunita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14519 of 2019 ====================================================== Sunita Kumari W/o Sukhendra Kumar Resident of Parsawan Kala, Parsawan Kalan, P.o. and P.s.- Gurua, Distt.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.

The District Magistrate Gaya 3.

The Sub-Divisional Officer Sherghati, Gaya 4.

The District Food Supply Officer Gaya 5.

Manngo Kumari W/o Vinary Kumar Vill.- Bdauna, P.o. and P.s.- Gurua, Distt.- Gaya ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shama Sinha, Advocate :

Mr. Surya Prakash, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Arvind Ujjwal (Sc4) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 14-10-2025

1. The present Writ petition is filed for the following reliefs:- "I. To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of certiorari for for quashing the selection of Respondent no.5 as Fair Price Dealer under the Public Distribution System in pursuant to memo no.

410/supply/Sherghati/dated 21.09.2017 for Block Guruaa, Panchayat-Tubba, Village Gullani, who being ineligible for selection, has been selected illegally by

2/6 rejecting the application of the Petitioner inspite of her having higher marks qua respondent no. 5.

II. To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents to select the Petitioner as Fair Price Dealer under the Public Distribution system in pursuant to the memo no.

410/supply/Sherghati/dated 21.09.2017 for Block Guruaa, Panchayat-Tubba, Village - Gullani, as the Petitioner is eligible for the appointment and more suitable for selection, having higher marks than the selected candidate (Respondent no.5).

III. To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents to hold an enquiry into the irregularities committed in the selection of the Fair Price Dealers under the Public Distribution system in pursuant to memo no.410/supply/Sherghati/dated21.9.2017.

IV. To any other relief or reliefs for which the Petitioner is found to be entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3/6

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 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.

4/6 (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. 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 Divisional Commissioner.

5/6

5. The Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that he intends to file a complaint/application before 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 complaint/application within one month from the date of receipt of this order before the concerned authority.

The delay in filing 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.

6/6

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) amitkr/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 16.10.2025 Transmission Date N/A