Disposed¶14

Raju Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC15 Sept 2025CWJC/13241/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court CWJC No.13241 of 2024; Raju Paswan v. The State of Bihar; decision 15-09-2025; PDS licence cancellation; Public Distribution System; respondent no. 3; Supply Appeal Case No. 241 of 2019; District Magistrate Purnea; order dated 08.03.2022; alternative and efficacious remedy; revision Section 32(vi) Control Order 2016; Divisional Commissioner; writ petition disposed; four-week filing window; four-week decision window; eight-week completion; notice, hearing and objections; communication of order.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; writ petition disposed of without deciding merits, petitioner being redirected to file a revision under Section 32(vi) of the Control Order 2016 before the Divisional Commissioner within prescribed time limits. ¶14

Raju Paswan Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ court should direct restoration of the petitioner's Public Distribution System (PDS) licence cancelled by respondent no. 3 and set aside the order dated 08.03.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Purnea in Supply Appeal Case No. 241 of 2019.

¶10

Court's answer

Without going into the merits or demerits, the court found the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy of filing a revision under Section 32(vi) of the Control Order 2016.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner was directed to approach the Divisional Commissioner and ventilate his grievance within four weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.

¶13

Key takeaways

On receipt of the revision, the Divisional Commissioner shall pass necessary orders strictly in accordance with law within four weeks thereof.ratio¶13
Before any order is passed, all parties shall be put on notice, given an opportunity of hearing and permitted to submit objections.ratio¶13
The entire exercise shall be completed expeditiously, preferably within eight weeks thereof.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

PATNA HIGH COURT (A. Abhishek Reddy, J) — CWJC No.13241 of 2024, Raju Paswan v. The State of Bihar, decided 15-09-2025: Writ petition praying for restoration of the petitioner's Public Distribution System (PDS) licence cancelled by respondent no. 3 and for setting aside the order dated 08.03.2022 of the District Magistrate, Purnea in Supply Appeal Case No. 241 of 2019 was disposed of without entering into merits, the court holding that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy of filing a revision under Section 32(vi) of the Control Order 2016. Petitioner directed to approach the Divisional Commissioner within four weeks of receipt of the order; on receipt of the revision the Commissioner is to put all parties on notice, give opportunity of hearing and submission of objections, and pass orders strictly in accordance with law within four weeks thereof, the entire exercise preferably to be completed within eight weeks, with any order communicated to all parties.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13241 of 2024

¶2

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

Raju Paswan

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (11) For the State : Mr. K.N. Jha, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY ORAL ORDER

¶8

2 15-09-2025 Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶9

The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief(s):-

¶10

“That the writ application is being filed for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders in the nature of mandamus to the Respondents authority directed to take proper step regarding to restored the Public Distribution System (PDS) license which has been cancelled by respondents no. 3 and also set aside the order dated 08.03.2022 passed by Learned Court of District Magistrate, Purnea in Supply Appeal Case No. 241 of 2019.”

¶11

Without going into the merits or demerits of the case, having regard to the fact that the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy of filing a revision under Section 32(vi) of the Control Order 2016. The petitioner is

¶12

Patna High Court CWJC No.13241 of 2024(2) dt.15-09-2025 2/2

¶13

directed to approach the Divisional Commissioner ventilating his grievance within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the revision, the Divisional Commissioner shall pass necessary orders strictly in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereof. It is needless to mention that before any order is passed, all the parties shall be put on notice and given an opportunity of hearing and submit their objections. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks thereof. Any order passed shall be communicated to all the parties.

¶14

With the above said directions, the writ petition stand disposed off

¶15

(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)

¶16

Gauravkr/-

¶17

Raju Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alok Kumar Vs The Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Limited

Mukud Shankar Kumar Nirala Vs Reserve Bank of India

Bharat Prasad Gupta Vs The State of Bihar

Narayan Yadav Inter College Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjeev Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rita Devi Vs The State of Bihar