Shradha Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.21690 of 2014 dt.03-08-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21690 of 2014 =========================================================== Shradha Ram, son of Late Dharichhan Ram. Resident of Village - Kesath, P.S. - Nawanagar, District - Buxar.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. District Magistrate, Buxar.

3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Dumraon, District - Buxar.

4. District Supply Officer, Buxar.

5. Supply Inspector, Dumraon, District - Buxar. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Mritunjay Prasad Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. J.P. KARN, AAG-4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 03-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs - "(i) For issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 12.09.2014 passed by the District Magistrate, Buxar in Supply Appeal Case No. 87/2013 by which he has rejected the appeal.

(ii) For issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 02.06.2003 in Memo No. 198 passed by the SubDivisional Officer, Dumraon by which he has cancelled licence of petitioner of Public Distribution System in the light of recommendation of the Supply Inspector as well as the Report/Recommendation of Assistant District Supply Officer, Buxar.

(iii) For issuance of writ of mandamus commanding the

Patna High Court CWJC No.21690 of 2014 dt.03-08-2018 respondent authority to restore the Public Distribution Licence of petitioner and to supply the food grains etc. to his shop.

(iv) For issuance of such other appropriate writ or orders for direction for the ends of justice."

3. At the very outset, this Court takes note that remedy by way of revision before the Divisional Commissioner is available to the petitioner against the impugned order dated 12.09.2014 passed in Supply Appeal Case No. 87 of 2013, which has not been availed of by the petitioner.

4. In view of availability of the alternative remedy as above, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition before the Divisional Commissioner for redressal of his grievances.

5. It is made clear that in case such a revision petition is filed, the concerned authority would have regard to the present proceeding being pursued by the petitioner, while considering any issue relating to condonation of delay, if applicable. (Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/BT AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 06.08.2018 Transmission Date N.A.