Suprita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1832 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8504 of 2020
     ======================================================

Suprita Kumari W/O Prit Ranjan Jha residence of Janki Nagar Bathnaha East, Ward no- 8, P.S. Bathnaha, District- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Consumer Affairs Department, Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.

3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Sitamarhi.

4. The District Supply Officer, Sitamarhi.

5. The Block Development Officers, Bathnaha, Sitamarhi.

6. The Block Supply Officers, Bathnaha, Sitamarhi.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. Raza Ahmad, AAG 5 Mr. Vishwambhar Prasad, AC to AAG 5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 26-03-2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an undertaking to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. The present writ petition has been filed "for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions to the respondent authority to set aside the memo no. 375 dated 02.07.2020 (Annexure-3) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi Sadar regarding cancellation of the PDS licence or disposed of the application (Appeal) dated 14.07.2020 (Annexure-

4) (erroneously mentioned as 14.06.2020) which is pending before the District Magsistrate, Sitamarhi (respondent no. 2); and for Patna High Court CWJC No.8504 of 2020 dt.26-03-2021

connected reliefs."

3. At the outset learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only for disposal of the appeal filed by him on 14.07.2020 (erroneously mentioned as 14.06.2020 in the prayer portion of the writ petition) before the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi, which is still pending.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents appears and has been heard.

5. Having regard to the nature of prayer of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, Sitmarhi (respondent no. 2) to consider and dispose of the petitioner's Supply Appeal dated 14.07.2020, if still pending, on its own merits and in accordance with law after grant of an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this judgment.

6. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para 1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J)

Chandran/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                -
Uploading Date          26.03.2021
Transmission Date       -