Ram Nath Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

“ For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or other appropriate writ/direction setting aside the notice issued under Memo No.624 dated 03.05.2017 (Annexure-P/1) by the Block Development Officer, Bairiya (R6) mechanically under the dictate of the respondent no.3 and 5 directing refund of value of undistributed rice under Sampurna Gramin Rojgar Yojna (SGRY) from the year 2002- 06 calculated at the

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.8894 of 2017 dt.10-07-2026 2/4

¶24

rate of Rs.13.70 per Kg. in place of Rs.8.78 per Kg. totalling a sum of rupees five lacs sixty six thousand two hundred thirty eight and for all other relief / reliefs he is found entitled to.

¶25

At the very outset, the Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition is no longer res integra . It is contended that the issue stands squarely covered by the order dated 20.06.2022 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 20474 of 2021 (Pramod Baitha Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors) and others analogous cases , wherein an identical issue was considered and adjudicated. The Learned counsel for the parties, therefore, submit that in view of the aforesaid judgment, the present writ petition may also be disposed of, in terms of the order dated 20.06.2022.

¶26

In Pramod Baitha (supra) this Court has held as follows:

¶27

“Under the aforesaid circumstances, this Court deems it

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.8894 of 2017 dt.10-07-2026 3/4

¶29

appropriate to direct the writ applicants to approach the respective Deputy Development Commissioners of the districts, within a period of two weeks, who would hear out the writ applicants personally or through their authorized representatives and fix the responsibility. In case it is found by the concerned DDCs that the petitioners are not at fault, he shall pass a reasoned order within a period of ten weeks of the receipt of such applications by the respective writ petitioners. In case it is found that the petitioners are under an obligation to return the quantified amount to the Government, that shall be done promptly.

¶30

Since the facts of the case of the writ applicants was not examined by the three member commission of inquiry, the concerned DDCs shall look into the matter dispassionately and shall pass a reasoned order, as noted above, within the time frame so provided.

¶31

Till such time, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners.

¶32

Needless to state that even the Government authorities shall be heard before passing a final order.

¶33

Patna High Court CWJC No.8894 of 2017 dt.10-07-2026

¶34

4/4

¶35

With the aforesaid

¶36

directions/observations all the writ petitions are disposed off.”

¶37

Having regard to the submissions made by the parties, the present writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment passed in Pramod Baitha (supra).

¶38

Interlocutory Application, if any, shall stands disposed of.

¶39

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)

¶40

Spd/-

¶41

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	13.07.2026
Transmission Date

Ram Nath Prasad v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Nath Prasad v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhay Kumar Pandey Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Swarup Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Priyanka Bharti Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rasalpura Primary Agriculture Co-operative Credit Society, Nandsena, Meskaour, Nalanda Vs The State of Bihar

Asharfi Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar