Patna High CourtCWJC/21295/2014disposed

Dhruv Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-03-13Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

Patna High Court CWJC No.21295 of 2014 dt.13-03-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21295 of 2014 =========================================================== Dhruv Prasad son of Late Vishwanath Sah, resident of village - Bhasurari, P.S. Shikarpur, District West Champaran ( Bettiah). .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate , Bettiah, West Champaran.

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran (Bettiah)

4. The Circle Officer Cum Block Supply Officer, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran, (Bettiah).

5. The Block Supply Inspector, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran (Bettiah).

6. The Block Supply Inspector, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran (Bettiah). .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Ravi Kumar, AC to GP-13 Mr. Ashok Kumar, Ac to GP-13 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs - "I. For quashing the order passed in Case No. C.R.M. No. 15/2012-13 dated 23.09.2014 passed by the District Magistrate (Respondent No. 2) whereby and whereunder the learned District Magistrate has pleased to reject the case of the petitioner.

II. For issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to restore the licence of the petitioner and further to give the direction to start the

Patna High Court CWJC No.21295 of 2014 dt.13-03-2018 work as Public Distribution System.

III. For any other relief or reliefs as your lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly accepts that a remedy by way of revision is available against the impugned appellate order of the District Magistrate, which has not been availed.

4. In the above circumstances, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the matter. The writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the revisional authority for redressal of his grievances.

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/BT AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 15.03.2018 Transmission Date N.A.