Sunita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar
2023 Latest Caselaw 2219 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                         Letters Patent Appeal No.286 of 2021
                                            In
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20403 of 2019
     ======================================================

Sunita Kumari, Wife of Surendra Kumar, Resident of Village- Kadarpur @ Kadirpur (Biraj), P.O. and P.S.- Suhail (Kothi), District- Gaya.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Officer-cum-District Magistrate, Gaya.

3. The District Supply Officer, Gaya.

4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sherghati, Gaya.

5. The Circle Officer, Imamganj, Gaya.

6. The Block Development Officer, Imamganj, Gaya.

7. The Block Supply Officer, Imamganj, Gaya.

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

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Birendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K. Shahi, A.G.

Mr. Alok Ranjan, A.C. to AAG-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 09-05-2023

The appellant was an applicant for P.D.S. licence and

it is the contention of the appellant that she stood at Serial No. 1

on merit for consideration for grant of such licence. However,

she was declined the same since she was a Panchayat Teacher at

the time of the application.

The appellant's contention is that though she was a

Panchayat Teacher at the time of application i.e. on 12.10.2017, Patna High Court L.P.A No.286 of 2021 dt.09-05-2023

she tendered resignation on 01.08.2018, which was accepted on

02.08.2018. The resignation was also confirmed by the Block

Education Officer, Imamganj, Gaya to the Block Supply Office,

Imamganj, Gaya on 22.02.2019. Despite her resignation, she

was not considered for Position No. 1. The learned counsel for

the appellant also places reliance on (2015) 14 SCC 469,

Neelam Tripathi v. Union of India and Ors. to buttress the

contention that merit cannot be overlooked.

The learned Single Judge found that as on the date of

inviting applications, she was a Panchayat Teacher and was

disentitled for consideration for grant of P.D.S. licence. The

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cited case was concerned with

the second meritorious candidate approaching the Indian Oil

Corporation Ltd. for grant of dealership, when the grant to the

first placed person was found to be illegal. The Indian Oil

Corporation Ltd. declined such consideration. The Hon'ble

Supreme Court held that after cancellation of the allotment

made in favour of the first in merit-list, the Corporation ought to

have accepted the second in merit-list. This is not to say that a

disqualified person should be considered, if her merit is above

all the other candidates. Disqualification works against the

consideration of the application itself and in such circumstances, Patna High Court L.P.A No.286 of 2021 dt.09-05-2023

we find no merit in the Letters Patent Appeal and the same is

dismissed.

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) P.K.P./Anushka AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 12.05.2023 Transmission Date