Patna High Court
Rakesh Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 19 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21969 of 2019
======================================================
Rakesh Kumar Son of Vishnu Ram Resident of Village- Banauli, P.S.- Simri,
District- Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer
Protection Department, Old Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Collector-Cum- Chairman District Selection Committee, Darbhanga,
District- Darbhanga.
3. The Sub- Divisional Officer-Cum- Licensing authority Sadar, Darbhanga,
District- Darbhanga.
4. Yamuna Self Help Group Sunita Devi, Village- Fultua, P.O.- Banauli, P.S.-
Simri, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. Raza Ahmad (AAG5)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 19-08-2025
1. The writ petition is filed for the
following reliefs:-
"That this writ application is
being filed on behalf of the petitioners
above named for issuance of an
appropriate writ, order or direction for
quashing the decision dated 07.08.2017
passed by the District Selection
Committee in a meeting under the
signature of the Collector, Darbhanga-
Patna High Court CWJC No.21969 of 2019 dt.19-08-2025
cum-Chairman, District Selection
Committee with others authorities
concerned by which name of the
petitioner whose name has been
mentioned by the same committee as No.
4 for issuance of PDS license in merit list
has not been selected and whose name is
mentioned at No. 1 has been
recommended and quashing the order if
any passed in the light of this decision
dated 07.08.2017 and further may direct
the SDO, Sadar Darbhanga to cancel the
PDS license of one private respondent
issued in the place of the petitioner
because no any order for the same has
been served to the petitioner for the same
and to issue PDS licence in the name of
the petitioner for which he is entitled in
accordance with law."
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)
Patna High Court CWJC No.21969 of 2019 dt.19-08-2025
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
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
Patna High Court CWJC No.21969 of 2019 dt.19-08-2025
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
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
Patna High Court CWJC No.21969 of 2019 dt.19-08-2025
the concerned authority. The delay in filing the
representation shall be condoned by the authority
concerned, and the authority shall dispose of the
same 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 19.08.2025
Transmission Date
