Sudhir Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5402 of 2019 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7361 of 2019 ====================================================== Sudhir Kumar, aged about 34 years, male, son of Hira Sah, R/o Village - Bhairopur, P.S. Kumarkhand, District-Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

Collector cum District Magistrate, Madhepura. 3.

Sub Divisional Magistrate, Madhepura.

4.

Block Supply Officer, Kumarkhand, District- Madhepura. 5.

Superintendent of Police, Madhepura.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satyaveer, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Alok Ranjan, AC to AAG 5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 23-11-2022 Heard Mr. Satyaveer, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Dinesh Prasad Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Alok Ranjan, learned AC to AAG 5 for the State.

2. The present application has been filed seeking recall of the order dated 30.05.2019 passed in CWJC No. 7361 of 2019 by which the writ petition was dismissed due to non-appearance.

3. The only reason given in the petition is that on the said day, learned counsel for the petitioner had gone to hospital for treatment and, thus, could not come to the Court. However, there is absolutely no explanation as to why after almost seven months, the present application has been filed when it is not the case of the

Patna High Court MJC No.5402 of 2019 dt.23-11-2022 2/2 petitioner that listing of the case and its dismissal on 30.05.2019 was not known to him. Further, from perusal of the record it appears that the writ petition itself was filed for quashing order passed for confiscation against the petitioner with regard to 1250 Kgs. of different food grains on 26.02.2018.

4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the order against which the petitioner had filed the writ petition is an appealable order under Section 6-C of The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 before the District Judge, which remedy he has not availed.

5. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner being a PDS dealer having indulged in such activity, the Court is not inclined to recall the order by which the writ petition was dismissed.

6. Accordingly, the present application also stands dismissed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/- AFR/NAFR U T