Dinesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ANR
Patna High Court CWJC No.2387 of 2016 dt.20-11-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2387 of 2016 =========================================================== Dinesh Kumar son of late Jitlal Sao, resident of Mohalla- Vidyadhar under Ward No. 10(Old), 3 (New) under Khagaria Municipality, P.S., Sub-Division and District- Khagaria .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, through the Collector, Khagaria
2. Sub-Divisional Officer, Supply Division, Khagaria .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Prasad, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Yogendra Pd. Sinha, AAG-15 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 20-11-2017 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing Memo No. 126 dated 22.05.2004 whereas the petitioner's licence under the Public Distribution System suspended, vide Memo No. 184 dated 21.08.2004 whereas the petitioner's licence has been cancelled without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, without issuing any show cause to the petitioner as well as the order dated 26.12.2006 passed by the District Magistrate, Khagaria in Supply Appeal Case No. 1/2004-05 and the order of learned Commissioner in Supply Revision No. 25 of 2007 whereby the learned Commissioner passed an order dated 16.07.2008 without consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, without giving any consent in the matter as contained in Annexures- 1, 2, 3 and 4 of this writ application.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2387 of 2016 dt.20-11-2017
2. At the very outset, this Court takes note that despite revisional order having been passed as far back as on 16.07.2008, the writ petition has been filed after a delay of more than seven years on 03.02.2016. The petitioner has failed to satisfy this Court with regard to the reasons for such delay. The petitioner has clearly not acted with due diligence and is guilty of delay and laches. This Court is therefore not inclined to interfere in the matter.
3. The writ petition stands dismissed.
(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 22.11.2017 Transmission Date N.A.