Leave Patent Appeal dismissing the application to set aside the Single Judge's order. The High Court held that the competent authority could not declare a late-filed certificate unreliable without inquiry. The appeal was dismissed.
The leave petition was dismissed, maintaining the single judge's order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.514 of 2019 In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19445 of 2018
======================================================
Kalpana Kumari Wife of Ajay Kumar Resident of Village- Duariya, P.O.Bhawanipur, P.S.- Pratapganj, District- Supaul.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Ms. Shrishti Singh, Adv. Mr. Pranav Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. Raza Ahmad, AAG-5 Mr. Vishwambhar Prasad, AC to AAG-5 For Respondent No.7 : Mr. Prashant Sinha, Adv. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR)
Date : 11-04-2023
Heard Ms. Shrishti Singh, learned advocate
for the appellant and Mr. Prashant Sinha, learned advocate for the respondent no.7. We have also heard Mr. Vishwambhar Prasad, learned advocate for the State.
The appellant was given the licence to run
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 514 of 2019 dt.11-04-2023 2/5
the Fair Price Shop in the event of respondent no.7 not having been found to have a computer degree.
The facts of the case is that against the advertisement for grant of licence in a particular area to run a Fair Price Shop, the appellant as well as respondent no.7, both had applied. The respondent no.7 was a graduate and also had a computer degree of Advance Diploma in Computer Application (ADCA). While filling up the form, respondent no.7 had not annexed the requisite certificates which was one of the essential requirements in the advertisement. However, permission was granted by the competent authority and a date was fixed for rectification/raising objections against the candidature of the others and further claim of the applicants.
It was in this context that after obtaining permission of the authorities, respondent no.7 was permitted to bring on record the requisite certificate of ADCA. However, the Screening Committee found that the certificate of computer
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 514 of 2019 dt.11-04-2023 3/5
learning offered by respondent no.7 was collusive and therefore her claim was negatived, making way for the appellant to be given the license to run the fair price shop.
This decision was challenged by the respondent no.7, who questioned the order passed by the authorities holding her candidature to be bad and granting licence to the appellant.
In the writ petition which was filed (C.W.J.C. No. 19445 of 2018), the learned single Judge took note of the fact that only under permission, the requisite certificate of computer knowledge was filed by the respondent no.7 and the assessment of the competent authority that such certificate was collusive, was without any substance as such statement was made without any on that account. investigation/verification Accordingly, the claim of respondent no.7 was allowed, the licence of the appellant was cancelled and respondent no.7 was given the licnece to run the Fair Price Shop.
Ms. Shrishti Singh, learned advocate for
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 514 of 2019 dt.11-04-2023 4/5
the appellant, had questioned the decision of the learned single Judge on two grounds that in view of the categorical requirement in the advertisement that all necessary certificates had to be enclosed along with the application form, the competent authorities could not have been so permissive to allow rectification of such application preferred by the aspirants. She has further submitted that once a decision had been taken by the competent authority holding the computer certificate in favour of respondent no.7 to be not reliable, a vested interest got created in favour of the appellant, which could not have been brushed aside lightly. Lastly, she has submitted that there has been no complaint whatsoever against her functioning as a PDS dealer.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the requisite certificate of qualification in computer of respondent no.7 was permitted to be filed by the competent authorities.
We are in agreement with the learned single Judge that such certificate could not have
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 514 of 2019 dt.11-04-2023 5/5
been held to be, in the absence of any verification or inquiry or investigation, to be unreliable for acceptance. Even otherwise, if that certificate was taken into account, respondent no.7 had a higher qualification of graduation.
Thus, finding no fault with the decision of the learned single Judge, we do not have any reason to interfere with the order.
The appeal is thus, dismissed.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J)
( Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| Uploading Date | 12-04-2023 |
| Transmission Date |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the single Judge's order granting a preference licence to the appellant while declaring the competitor's application due to a belated certificate filing.
Whether a Computer Application certificate submitted belatedly under permission can be held unreliable without any verification or inquiry investigation.
Whether the vested interest created in the appellant by the non-rejection of the late certificate can be ignored given the lack of complaint against the appellant.
Kalpana Kumari
The State of Bihar
Principal Secretary Food and Consumer Protection Department
District Magistrate Supaul
Additional Collector Supaul
District Supply Officer Supaul
Ashutosh Kumar
Harish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
