Puja Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

“ For issuance of appropriate writ in nature of Mandamus or any appropriate writ (S) and direction to the respondent authorities and to set aside the selection latter dated 19.5.2018 whereby selection committee has selected the respondent no. 7 for issuance of P.D.S. licence and further to set aside the licence no. 36/18 issued in favour respondent no. 7 in pursuance of aforesaid

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.19762 of 2019 dt.24-06-2026 2/5

¶23

selection letter, for which petitioner was entitle too.”

¶24

At this juncture, the Learned counsel for the respondents contended that Section 32(iii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 provides for the provision of appeal and Section 32(vi) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 provides for the provision of revision. Section 32(iii) 32(v) and 32(vi) read as follows:

¶25

“32 (iii). Any person aggrieved by an order of the licensing authority denying the issue or renewal of the license to the fair price shop owner or cancellation of the license may appeal to the District Officer within thirty days of the date of receipt of the order and the District Magistrate shall, as far as practicable, dispose the appeal within a period of sixty days.”

¶26

(v) Till the disposal of appeal pending, the Appellate Authority may direct that the order under appeal shall not take effect for such period as the authority may consider necessary for giving a reasonable opportunity to the other party under sub-clause (4) or until the appeal is disposed of,

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.19762 of 2019 dt.24-06-2026 3/5

¶28

whichever is earlier.

¶29

(vi) Due to non disposal of the appeal within sixty days by the District Officer or against the order passed in the appeal, a revision may be filed before the Divisional Commissioner. The revision shall be disposed of within two months.

¶30

Admittedly, from the reliefs prayed for in

¶31

the Writ petition, it is evident that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under the provisions of Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.

¶32

The remedy available under the Act is to prefer an appeal before the District Magistrate. As

¶33

the District Magistrate is the head of the Selection Committee, he cannot review his order in an appeal. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to file

¶34

a complaint/application before the Divisional Commissioner.

¶35

The Learned counsel for the petitioner

¶36

Patna High Court CWJC No.19762 of 2019 dt.24-06-2026 4/5

¶37

contended that he intends to file a

¶38

complaint/application before the concerned authority, but the limitation period for filing the same has lapsed. He prayed for a direction to the concerned authority to entertain the same in accordance with Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

¶39

Taking into consideration that the petitioner has an alternative remedy for filing complaint/application, the Writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file complaint/application within one month from the date of receipt of this order before the concerned authority. The delay in filing the complaint/application shall be condoned by the authority concerned, and the authority shall dispose of the same within three months from the date of filing of the same.

¶40