Dismissed

Sujata Kumari v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC25 Jun 2019CWJC/3060/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A legitimate piecemeal disposal order upholding the statutory appeal remedy under the Bihar Targeted PDS Control Order, 2016, while declaring the writ application not maintainable for disputes concerning PDS license village eligibility criteria.

What did the court decide?

The Writ application stands disposed of. The petitioner is directed to file an appeal before Respondent No. 3 under the Bihar Targeted PDS (Control) Order, 2016.

Sujata Kumari Vs The State of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3060 of 2019

¶2

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

¶3

Sujata Kumari aged about 27 years (Female), W/o Ujjawal Kumar Resident of Village-Sonama,P.O.-Kothia,P.S. Didarganj,Dist.-Patna

¶4

... ... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Food Consumer Protection Department,Govt. of Bihar, Patna

¶7

The Chairman, District Level Selection Committee,District-Patna

The Collector-cum-District Magistrate,Patna

¶13

The District Supply Officer, Patna

¶14

The Sub Divisional Officer, Patna City,Dist.-Patna

¶15

The Block Supply Officer, Patna Sadar,Dist.-Patna

¶16

Bindi Devi Sri Ram Sujit Kumar Resident of Village - Mohammadpur, P.O. Kothia, P.S. Didarganj, Dist.-Patna

¶17

... ... Respondents

¶18

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Ms. Preety Kunwar, Advocate For the State : Mr. S. Raza Ahmad, Sr. Advocate (AAG-5) For the Respondent/s : Mr.Alok Ranjan, AC to AAG-5 ======================================================

¶19

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶20

2. 25-06-2019

¶21

In the nature of the controversy raised with respect to

¶22

the name of the village as appearing in the advertisement and claim of the petitioner that she belongs to village – Sonama, after some argument, learned senior counsel representing the petitioner submits that this court may take an appropriate view of the matter and issue necessary direction in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶23

Learned counsel for the State submits that the objection of the petitioner has been duly considered by the Sub-

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.3060 of 2019(2) dt.25-06-2019 2/3

¶25

Divisional Officer and the same has been rejected vide Annexure ‘5’ to the Writ Application giving reasons in support thereof. It is also submitted that in case the petitioner has any grievance against Annexure ‘5’ she has a remedy of statutory appeal provided under the Bihar Targeted PDS (Control) Order, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Control Order, 2016’).

¶26

After hearing learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State, this court finds that the nature of the dispute raised by the petitioner is with regard to the name of the village mentioned in the advertisement. It is her case that village – Gyanchak, Sonama is to be interpreted as if the applicant having their place of business in any one of the villages may be considered for the Sonama Gram Panchayat.

¶27

So far as respondent no. 7 is concerned, she has her business place at Gyanchak and the Sub-Divisional Officer has taken a view that in the Gram Panchayat Sonama village – Gyanchak is the recognized business place as per advertisement.

¶28

This court is of the considered opinion that such grievance may be raised, if so advised, in accordance with the provisions of Control Order, 2016 before the respondent no. 3 who is the statutory authority to decide an appeal against grant of P.D.S. License. If any appropriate application/appeal is

¶29

Patna High Court CWJC No.3060 of 2019(2) dt.25-06-2019 3/3

¶30

preferred by the petitioner, the same will be considered within the statutory period.

¶31

So far as the writ jurisdiction of this court is concerned, it is not the appropriate jurisdiction to decide the kind of dispute raised in the present writ application.

¶32

Accordingly, this Writ application stands disposed of.

¶33

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶34

Rajeev/-

¶35

Sujata Kumari v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujata Kumari 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

M/s Radhey Forgings Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Nageshwar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

M/s Ganesh Ram Dokania Vs The State of Bihar

Bimla Devi Vs Union Of India and Ors.

Sudhir Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Munna Yadav @ Ashok Yadav @ Ashok Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.