Ras Bihari Rai v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3811 of 2017 ====================================================== Ras Bihari Rai S/o Late Dudheshwar Rai Resident of Village - Baruhi, P.S. Sahar, District - Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Bhojpur 2.
The District Magistrate, Bhojpur, Ara.
3.
The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar Bhojpur, Ara. 4.
The District Supply Officer, Bhojpur, Ara.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Surya Kant Mishra, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Arvind Ujjwal- Sc4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 18-03-2023
1. The petitioner challenged the order dated 28.12.2011 (Annexure-3), passed by respondent no. 3 , namely the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar Arra, Bhojpur, in Memo No. 1415, whereby his licence for PDS dealership was cancelled. The petitioner also challenged the order dated 28.10.2014 (Annexure-1), passed by respondent no.2, namely the District Magistrate, Bhojpur, Arra, whereby appeal preferred against the said order was rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after passing of the appellate order, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition and the same has been pending for almost 6 years.
3. This Court finds that the P.D.S. dealership licence
Patna High Court CWJC No.3811 of 2017(4) dt.18-03-2023 2/2 of the petitioner was cancelled in the year 2011 and more than 12 years have passed by. In lieu thereof, at this stage, it would not be appropriate to examine the matter and by efflux of time, the present writ petition has rendered infructuous and no relief of renewing/restoring of licence can be granted to him after 12 years of cancellation of licence. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be always eligible to apply again for the PDS dealership, if he so chooses.
4. As such, with the above observations, the present writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous by efflux of time with aforesaid liberty to the petitioner. (Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Pravinkumar/- Item No. 21 U