Disposed

Suresh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC7 Apr 2014CWJC/11996/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the petitioner to file a revision before the Divisional Commissioner regarding the cancellation of his PDS license under accelerated timelines, without determining the merits of the plea that his criminal case resulted in acquittal.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to file revision before Divisional Commissioner within four weeks; original writ petition disposed.

Suresh Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11996 of 2013

¶2

====================================================== 1. Suresh Yadav S/O Sri Deoki Yadav Resident Of Village - Piparghatti, P.S. - Dobhi, District - Gaya .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, Gaya 3. The District Supply Officer, Gaya 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sherghati, District - Gaya 5. The Block Supply Officer, Dobhi, District - Gaya .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Y.P. Sinha, AAG 15. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 3 07-04-2014 Heard Mr. Rakesh Singh, counsel for the petitioner and AC to AAG 15 for the State. The petitioner held the license issued to him vide license no. 416/2007 dated 30.11.2007 issued under the Bihar Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 (For short ‘the Control Order). In discharge of his duty as owner of the public distribution shop certain allegations were leveled against the petitioner which led to institution of a criminal case vide Sherghati (Dobhi) PS Case Bi, 154/2012. A proceeding for cancellation of license was also initiated in which the petitioner was issued a show cause notice. After his release from police custody, the petitioner filed his reply on 31.8.2012. Having considered the

¶3

Patna High Court CWJC No.11996 of 2013 (3) dt.07-04-2014

¶4

2/3

¶5

material on record the licensing authority by order dated 11.10.2012 (Annexure 5) cancelled the license of the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, a writ petition vide CWJC No. 20608/2012 was filed by the petitioner. The said writ petition was disposed of on 5.11.2012 (Annexure 6) permitting the petitioner to file an appeal. The petitioner thereafter filed appeal challenging the validity of the order dated 11.10.2012 vide Appeal No. 03/2013. The appellate authority by order dated 5.3.2013 (Annexure 7) dismissed the said appeal. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said order passed by the appellate authority.

¶6

The contention of the petitioner is that the criminal case which was launched against the petitioner has already ended in acquittal. The basis of taking punitice action against the petitioner now no more exists.

¶7

2001 Control Order has been amended with effect from 23.6.2011. After such amendment a new forum has been created for ventilation of grievances against the appellate order passed by the District Magistrate.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly drawn attention of the court to such provisions which has amended clause 15 of the Control Order and provides that revision shall be filed before the Divisional Commissioner against the appellate

¶9

Patna High Court CWJC No.11996 of 2013 (3) dt.07-04-2014

¶10

3/3

¶11

order passed by the District Magistrate. Such revision application is required to be disposed of within a period of three months from the date of filing / presentation.

¶12

Considering the aforesaid aspect this court without opining any view on the merit of the contention of the parties should permit the petitioner to file a proceeding before the revisional authority challenging the validity of the original order as well as the appellate order passed by the District Magistrate. If any such revision is filed within four weeks, the revisional authority shall consider and dispose of the same strictly in the light of the provisions contained in the amended provisions.

¶13

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶14

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)

¶15

haque/-

Suresh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Prakash Gupta Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Upnesh Kumar Vs The Patna Municipal Corporatio and Ors.

Md. Muslim Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dev Narayan Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ghanshyam Choubey Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Amarnath Mahto Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.