Patna High Court
Nutan Kishlay vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 13 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21688 of 2018
======================================================
Nutan Kishlay Wife of Santosh Kumar, Resident of Village-Yogiraj, P.O.-
Nayatola, P.S. Puraini Bazar, District-Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Department, of Food and Civil Supplies,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Collector-Cum-Chairman of Distirct Level Fair Price Shop Selection
Committee, Madhepura, Distri
4. The District Magistrate, Madhepura, District-Madhepura.
5. The District Supply Officer-Cum Secretary, Fair Price Shop Selection
Committee, Madhepura, District
6. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Udakishunganj, District-Madhepura.
7. Priyanka Kumari Wife of Sonu Kumar, Resident of Village-Yogiraj P.S.-
Puraini Bazar, District-Madhepura.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.Raza Ahmad -AAG-5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 13-08-2025
1. The writ petition is filed for the following
reliefs:-
(i) For issuance of writ
in the nature of mandamus or
any other appropriate writ/
order/ direction to the
respondent to cancel the
selection of the Respondent No.
7 for fair price dealership as the
petitioner is a better candidate
than the the Respondent No. 7.
(ii) Further for issuance
Patna High Court CWJC No.21688 of 2018 dt.13-08-2025
of a writ in the nature of
mandamus or any other
appropriate writ/order/direction
to the respondents to produce
the certificate/ licence if the
same has been issued by the
authority concerned and further
to cancel the same.
(iii) Further, for issuance
of a writ in the nature of
mandamus or any other
appropriate writ/order/direction
to the respondents to stay the
operation of the certificate
/licence if issued to the
Respondent No. 7 for fair price
dealership shop till the final
disposal of this matter and/or to
maintain status-quo if the
licence/ certificate has not been
issued in the favour of the
Respondent No. 7.
(IV) Further, for
issuance of any other
appropriate writ/ orders/
directions to the respondents as
per the facts and circumstances
of this case.
Patna High Court CWJC No.21688 of 2018 dt.13-08-2025
2. 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:
"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."
32. (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
Patna High Court CWJC No.21688 of 2018 dt.13-08-2025
other party under sub-clause (4) or
until the appeal is disposed of,
whichever is earlier.
(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.
3. Admittedly, from the reliefs prayed for
in 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.
4. The remedy available under the Act is to
prefer an appeal before the District Magistrate. As
the District Magistrate is the head of the Selection
Committee, he cannot review his orders in an
appeal. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to file
a complaint/application before the Divisional
Commissioner.
5. The Learned counsel for the petitioner
contended that he intends to file a representation
before the concerned authority, but the limitation
Patna High Court CWJC No.21688 of 2018 dt.13-08-2025
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.
6. Taking into consideration that the
petitioner has an alternative remedy for filing
representation, the writ petition is disposed of with
a direction to the petitioner to file representation
within one month from the date of receipt of this
order before the concerned authority. The delay in
filing the representation shall be condoned by the
authority concerned, and the authority shall
dispose of the same in accordance with law within
three months from the date of filing of the same.
7. With the above said observation, the
Writ petition is disposed of.
8. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall
stand disposed of.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
Manish/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 18.08.2025
Transmission Date
