Chandeshwar Sah v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1663 of 2016 ====================================================== Chandeshwar Sah Son of Late Ram Janam Sah resident of VillageSiswan, Police Station- G.B. Nagar, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Principal Secretary, Food Supplies and Commerce Department, Government of Bihar Patna.

3.

The Divisional Commissioner Saran Division at Chapra. 4.

The District Magistrate, Siwan.

5.

Sub Divisional Officer, Siwan Sadar, Siwan.

6.

Block Supply Officer, Pachrukhi, District- Siwan. ... ... Respondent/s =================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Siddharth Harsh, Adv.

For the Respondent :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to GP-23 =================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 03-04-2023 The petitioner has preferred this writ petition assailing the order of cancellation of his license by the S.D.O. dated 10.12.2011 and the order passed by the appellate authority dated 27.03.2015 and the order passed by the commissioner in

Patna High Court CWJC No.1663 of 2016 dt.03-04-2023 2/3 revision dated 31.08.2015.

Learned counsel submits that all the three authorities have failed to take notice of the fact that the petitioner was in possession of the coupons issued to the consumers under the Antyodaya and BPL schemes at their own behest, affidavits have been filed along with his reply. In support of the fact that the coupons were kept by the consumers with the dealer for their safety as their houses were not safe for keeping them.

The said defence taken by the petitioner has been found to be without basis by all the three fact finding authorities.

In writ jurisdiction, this Court would have a limited scope. It is only the decision making process which is examined by this Court and not the decision itself. Once the arguments taken by the petitioner has been examined and the decision has been arrived at by the concerned competent authority. This Court would not substitute its own decision to that of the concerned competent authority while exercising the writ jurisdiction.

Keeping in view of the above, no case for interference is made out.

Patna High Court CWJC No.1663 of 2016 dt.03-04-2023 3/3 The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Gauravkr/- Item No. 48 AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 21.04.2023 Transmission Date