Patna High CourtCWJC/11738/2014dismissed

Vijay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-08-24Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11738 of 2014 =========================================================== Vijay Kumar Son of Lome Raj Thakur, Resident of Village- Ganga Sirsiya, P.OPuran Chapra, P.S- Chakia, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Food, Supply and Commerce, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran.

3. District Supply Officer, East Champaran, Motihari.

4. Sub Divisional Officer, Chakia, Motihari, East Champaran.

5. Block Supply Officer, Kalyanpur, Motihari, East Champaran. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Kumar No.III, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ranjit Kumar, AC to GP 26 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 24-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to restore the licence no. 16/93 as was granted to the petitioner for running shop under Public Distribution System situated in the Panchayat of Medan Sirsiya within Anchal Kalayanpur in the district of East Champaran, Motihari.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the licence of the petitioner was illegally suspended in terms of letter no. 463 dated 21.08.1998 (Annexure-1) and in respect of which the petitioner claims to have filed a representation on 23.12.2013.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11738 of 2014 dt.24-08-2018 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, resists the writ petition on the ground of inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court.

5. This Court is in agreement with the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents. The order of suspension dated 21.08.1998 (Annexure-1) was admittedly passed 15 years before the present writ petition has been filed in the year 2014. Clearly there is inordinate delay and laches on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court who has not acted with due diligence for redressal of his grievances.

6. This Court accordingly is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition stands dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 04.09.2018 Transmission Date N.A.