Disposed

Anil Prasad Singh,Advocate v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC17 Sept 2012CWJC/3311/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner alleged misuse of coupons in his name due to non-delivery of kerosene oil. The Court directed the District Magistrate to reconsider the petitioner's representation and take action against the culprit within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directing the District Magistrate, Vaishali to reconsider the representation and take action against the person misusing coupons within two months.

Anil Prasad Singh,Advocate Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — RTI and Transparency | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3311 of 2012

¶2

====================================================== Anil Prasad Singh, Advocate, Patna High Court S/O Sri Ragho Prasad Singh R/O Village- Kadilpur, Ward No.-8, Bahasi Saidpur, Panchayat Block- Jandaha, District- Vaishali, At Present - Raj Raghu Bhavan, C/O Dr. Raghu Nath Prasad, Harni Chak, Anishabad, Patna

¶3

.... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. D.M., Vaishali At Hajipur 3. S.D.O., Mahua, District- Vaishali 4. B.D.O., Jandaha, District- Vaishali 5. District Supply Officer, Vaishali

¶4

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

¶5

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh ( In person) For the Respondents : Mr. Shambhu Nath, AC to AAG-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶6

3 17-09-2012 Heard the petitioner in person as also the counsel for the

¶7

State.

¶8

Petitioner is aggrieved by the misuse of coupon Nos. 1926 and 2043 said to have been issued in his name, although he was not delivered kerosene oil in the light of the two coupons. Highlighting the aforesaid non-delivery of kerosene oil and issue of the forged coupons, he submitted representation dated 23.10.2010, Annexure-1 before the District Magistrate, Vaishali whereafter enquiries were made and information was given to the petitioner under Memo No. 1012 dated 17.6.2011, Annexure-3 by District Supply Officer, Vaishali that the required information is

¶9

Patna High Court CWJC No.3311 of 2012 (3) dt.17-09-2012

¶10

2 / 2

¶11

not being furnished by the person who is authorized to distribute coupons in spite of due direction given to him to produce the required register under letter No. 35 dated 9.6.2011.

¶12

Let the District Magistrate, Vaishali consider the representation of the petitioner dated 23.10.2010, Annexure-1 in the light of the instructions of the District Supply Officer, Vaishali contained in Memo No. 1012 dated 17.6.2011, Annexure-3 within a reasonable time, not exceeding two months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order before the District Magistrate, Vaishali and take appropriate action against the person who is found to have misused the aforesaid coupons.

¶13

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶14

(V.N. Sinha, J)

¶15

Arjun/-

Anil Prasad Singh,Advocate v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Prasad Singh,Advocate v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Aamil Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Sanjeev Kumar Roy Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Nityanand Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Sri Akil Pd. Jaiswal Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Umesh Pd. Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

T.M.Rizwanul Haque Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.