Disposed

Jitendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC23 Apr 2019CWJC/2136/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the selection of others for a Public Distribution System licence under the handicapped quota despite the petitioner having higher marks. The Court directed the District Magistrate to examine the petitioner's representation and decide within four months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Magistrate to look into the petitioner's representation dated 07.12.2018 and take an appropriate decision within four months.

Jitendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2136 of 2019

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Jitendra Kumar, Male, aged about 26 years, Son of Vishwanath Sah, Resident of Village- Khartari, ward No. 10, P.S. Chiraiya, District- East Champaran845415.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Bihar.

¶7

The Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Department, Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The District Magistrate, East Champaran.

¶9

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.

¶10

The District Supply Officer, East Champaran.

¶11

The Senior Additional Collector, East Champaran.

¶12

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Chakia District East Champaran.

¶13

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Areraj, District-East Champaran.

¶14

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sikrahna, Dhaka, District- East Champaran.

¶15

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Raxaul, District- East Champaran.

¶16

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Pakridayal, District- East Champaran.

¶17

The District Cooperative Officer, East Champaran.

¶18

Sunil Kumar, Male, aged about 24 years, Son of Ram Vinay Prasad Gupta, Resident of Village- Khartari, Ward No. 10, P.S. Chiraiya, District- East Champaran- 845415.

¶19

Pramod Kumar, Male, aged about 20 years, Son of Bindeshwar Sah, Resident of Village- Khartari, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Chiraiya, District- East Champaran- 845415.

¶20

... ... Respondent/s

¶21

======================================================

¶22

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Surendra Kishore Thakur, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.U.P.Singh, AC to SC 4. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶23

2 23-04-2019 Petitioner in this case is aggrieved by the Resolution

¶24

dated 02.11.2018 to the extent that the respondent nos.13 and 14 have been selected for Public Distribution System Licence for Gram Panchayat Raj Khartari under the handicapped category. It

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.2136 of 2019(2) dt.23-04-2019 2/3

¶26

is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is having higher marks still he has not been selected, whereas, respondent nos.13 and 14 have been selected by exceeding the quota meant for handicapped category.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a representation to the District Magistrate, East Champaran on 07.12.2018 vide Annexure ‘3’ to the writ application but the same has not been considered till date and the illegally selected candidates are getting the fruits of the licence granted to them.

¶28

Learned counsel for the State submits that, at this stage, the writ application may be disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, East Champaran to look into the grievance of the petitioner and take an appropriate decision thereon.

¶29

Considering the nature of submission and the grievance of the petitioner, this Court directs the District Magistrate, East Champaran to look into the representation dated 07.12.2018 enclosed as Annexure ‘3’ to the writ application, consider the same and take an appropriate decision thereon in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶30

Patna High Court CWJC No.2136 of 2019(2) dt.23-04-2019 3/3

¶31

It goes without saying that before passing the final order all concerned who are likely to be effected by the order of

¶32

the District Magistrate be given an opportunity of hearing.

¶33

The writ application stands disposed of.

¶34

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶35

R.R.Ojha/-

¶36

Jitendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar 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

Barun Kumar Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sheo Shankar Prasad Singh @ Sheo Shankar Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Jitendra Kumar Vs The South Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited and Ors.

Chandrama Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ranjeeta Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

M/s Aryabhat Computers Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.