Patna High CourtCWJC/14218/2014disposed

Rajendra Mehta v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-07-26Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14218 of 2014 =========================================================== Rajendra Mehta, son of Sri Mahabir Mahato, resident of village Umman Bigha, P.S. Wazirganj, District Gaya .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Food and Supply, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Chairman, State Food Corporation, Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Collector, Gaya

5. The District Supply Officer, Gaya.

6. The S.D.O. Sadar, Gaya.

7. The Block Supply Officer, Wazirganj, Gaya .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Prithivi Raj Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Kritya Nand Jha, AC to SC 29 For the BSFC : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Singh, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 26-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the appellate order dated 18.06.2012 in Case No. 46/2004 passed by the Court of District Collector, Gaya as well as the order dated 06.09.2009 passed by S.D.O. Gaya Sadar vide Memo No. 32 dated 06.09.2009; and for connected reliefs.

3. At the very outset, this Court takes note that remedy by way of revision before the Divisional Commissioner is available to the petitioner against the impugned order passed in Case No. 46/2004,

Patna High Court CWJC No.14218 of 2014 dt.26-07-2018 2/2 which has not been availed of by the petitioner.

4. In view of availability of the alternative remedy as above, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition before the Divisional Commissioner, Gaya for redressal of his grievances.

5. It is made clear that in case such a revision petition is filed, the concerned authority would have regard to the present proceeding being pursued by the petitioner, while considering any issue relating to condonation of delay, if applicable. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 28.07.2018 Transmission Date N.A.