Ganesh Kumar vs The State Of Bihar
2022 Latest Caselaw 25 Patna

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 25 Patna
Judgement Date : 3 January, 2022

Patna High Court

Ganesh Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 3 January, 2022

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10075 of 2021
     ======================================================

Ganesh Kumar, Son of Late Kamleshwari Thakur, Resident of Mohalla- Hajipur (Khagaria) Ward No. -17, Khagaria Municipal Council, P.S. and District- Khagaria, 851204, Presently P.D.S. Dealer, Ward No.-17, Khagaria Municipal Council, P.O. and P.S. and District- Khagaria.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar Bihar.

2. The Divisional Commissioner Munger Division, Munger.

3. The Collector Khagaria.

4. Sub- Divisional Officer Khagaria.

5. The Block Supply Officer Khagaria, District- Khagaria.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dronacharya, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. Rajz, Ahmad, AAG-5 Mr. Arvind Ujjwal, SC-4

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 03-01-2022

Petitioner has prayed for the following relief/s :- Patna High Court CWJC No.10075 of 2021 dt.03-01-2022

After the matter was heard for some time, Shri S.

Raza Ahmad, learned Additional Advocate General No. 5 fairly

states that the full text of Section 28 of the Bihar Targeted

Public Distribution System Control Order, 2016 was not brought

to the notice of the Court, which led to the passing of an order

dated 01.12.2021 in C.W.J.C. No. 4332 of 2021, titled as Doctor

Yadav Vs. The State of Bhar and Ors.

Had the full text been brought to the notice of the

Court, we are sure that the Court would have taken a different

view, for as we notice, the provisions are unambiguously clear

and the time frame stipulated in Rule 28 of the Order itself

stipulates a further condition being adhered to "as far as

possible".

In this view of the matter, reliance on the said

decision is totally misconceived in law for the decision being

per incurium.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner

fairly states that petitioner shall be content if the petition is Patna High Court CWJC No.10075 of 2021 dt.03-01-2022

disposed of with direction to the respondent authorities to

consider and decide the petitioner's case, which is pending

consideration, on expeditious basis.

Shri S. Raza Ahmad, learned Additional Advocate

General No. 5 states that State has no objection to the same.

As such, petition stands disposed of in the

following terms:-

(a) The authority concerned shall consider

and decide the case of confiscation/proceedings

expeditiously by a reasoned and speaking order preferably

within a period of four weeks from the date of placing on

record copy of the order;

(b) Needless to add, while considering such

representation, principles of natural justice shall be

followed and due opportunity of hearing afforded to the

parties;

(c). Petitioner shall appear before the

authority concerned on 17th of January, 2022 along with a

copy of this order;

(d) Petitioner undertakes to fully cooperate

and not take any unnecessary adjournment;

(e) Equally, liberty is reserved to the Patna High Court CWJC No.10075 of 2021 dt.03-01-2022

petitioner to take recourse to such alternative remedies as

are otherwise available in accordance with law;

(f) We are hopeful that as and when petitioner

takes recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available

in law, before the appropriate forum, the same shall be

dealt with, in accordance with law and with reasonable

dispatch;