Binod Kuamr Sah v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8190 of 2016 ====================================================== Binod Kumar Sah, Son of Sri Paras Sah, resident of Chandan Nagar, Gulab Bag, P.S.- Sadar, District-Purnea, Proprietor of Hari Lal Rice Mill Udyag, Gulab Bag, Purnea.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Food and Consumer Protection, Govt. of Bihar, Patna..

3. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., Patna.

4. The Deputy Chief (Claim), Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., Patna.

5. The District Magistrate, Purnea.

6. The District Manager, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Purnea.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar For the Respondent-State : Ms. Kalpana, AC to SC-19 For the Respondent-BSFC : Mr. Aditya PrakashSahay ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 18-05-2016 Heard Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Aditya Prakash Sahay, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation.

The prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the authorities of the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation including the Managing Director of the Corporation and the District Magistrate, Purnea for payment of the dues of the petitioner as per his claim raised at Annexure-5 which is in respect of handling and transportation of custom milled rice on

Patna High Court CWJC No.8190 of 2016 (2) dt.18-05-2016 behalf of the Corporation and relates to the period Kharif Marketing Season 2014-15.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the grievance raised, I deem it fit and proper to direct the Managing Director, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, respondent no.3 and the District Manager, Purnea, the respondent no.6, to consider the grievance raised by the petitioner as noted hereinabove and dispose of the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

It goes without saying that if the claim so raised by the petitioner is found admissible, the same be paid to him within the period stipulated above, however, in case any part of the claim is not found admissible, the same be disposed of by a speaking order, to be passed only after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

(Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- U