Petitioner challenged an order without exhausting statutory appeal remedy. Court held it cannot interfere but directed Appellate Authority to decide on merits if appeal is filed within 30 days.
Petitioner directed to file appeal within 30 days; Appellate Authority to decide within 60 days.
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 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21829 of 2019
======================================================
Bipin Kumar, S/o Late Ramchandra Prasad, Resident of Village- Tiuri, P.S. - Manpur, District- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjaya Nath Tiwari, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. Raza Ahmad (AAG-5) Mr. Alok Ranjan, AC to AAG-5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR)
Date : 20-01-2023
Heard Mr. D.N. Tiwari, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Alok Ranjan for the State.
Mr. Tiwari submits that the grounds raised by the petitioner in defence of the charge intimated to him in the notice has not at all been considered.
In fact, according to Mr. Tiwari, all the complainants, on whose statements, the proceeding was
Patna High Court CWJC No.21829 of 2019 dt.20-01-2023 2/3
initiated against the petitioner, have testified that they have no complaint against the licensee/the petitioner.
It is the contention of Mr. Tiwari that in view of such statements from the beneficiaries, the Licensing Authority was required to ascertain the truth in their statements and only thereafter should have passed the order. That not having been done, the order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
We are afraid whether such ground can be entertained by us in the present writ petition when the petitioner has not elected to exhaust his statutory remedy of appeal.
For the afore-noted reason, we do not wish to interfere in the matter but we direct that in case an appeal is filed by the petitioner within a period of thirty days, raising all the issues which have been flagged in the present writ petition, the Appellate Authority shall, after giving reasonable time to the petitioner to represent his cause, decide the issue and pass a reasoned order within next sixty days.
The order so passed by the Appellate Authority shall be made available to the petitioner forthwith.
Patna High Court CWJC No.21829 of 2019 dt.20-01-2023 3/3
With the afore-noted direction/observation, the writ
petition stands disposed of.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J)
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
kundan/rishi-2
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date Transmission Date
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the licensing authority's order when the petitioner has not exhausted statutory remedy of appeal.
Whether the Licensing Authority's failure to consider the petitioner's defense grounds constitutes a legal ground for interference.
What order the Licensing Authority should follow if the petitioner files an appeal within thirty days.
Bipin Kumar
The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
The Collector, Nalanda
The Sub Divisional Officer, Biharsharif
The Additional District Supply Officer, Biharsharif
The Block Supply Officer, Biharsharif
Ashutosh Kumar
Satyavrat Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
