Patna High Court
Khenhari Ram vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 8 July, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13666 of 2017
======================================================
Khenhari Ram son of Late Udi Ram, Resident of Village- Govind Fandah,
P.S.- Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer
Conservation Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
3. The District Magistrate- cum-Collector, Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi Sadar-cum-Licensing Authority,
District- Sitamarhi.
5. The Additional Collector Departmental Enquiry, Sitamarhi, District-
Sitamarhi.
6. The Block Supply Officer, Dumra, District- Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : M/s Manish Kumar, GP 4
Sanjay Parasmani, AC to GP 4
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 08-07-2025
1. The petitioner has filed the Writ petition
for the following reliefs:
" (I). For issuance of an appropriate
writ in the nature of CERTIORARI for
quashing the order dated
21.03.2017
passed by the
Respondent no.2 in P.D.S. Revision
Case No. 40 of 2017, whereby and
where under the Respondent no.2
has been pleased to reject the
revision case filed by the petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.13666 of 2017 dt.08-07-2025
by saying that there is no need for
interfering the order passed by the
learned court below.
(II) For issuance of an appropriate
writ in the nature of CERTIORARI for
quashing the order dated
23.12.2016 passed by the
Respondent no.3 in Supply Appeal
Case No.50 of 2016 whereby and
where under the Respondent no.3
has been pleased to reject the
appeal filed by the petitioner and
affirm the order dated 10.06.2016
passed by the Respondent no.4.
(III) For issuance of an appropriate
writ in the nature of CERTIORARI for
quashing the order dated
10.06.2016 passed by the
Respondent no.4 and contained in
his memo no.245 dated 10.06.2016
whereby and where under the
Respondent no.4 has been pleased
to cancel the license of the
petitioner under the Public
Distribution System (hereinafter
referred to as P.D.S.) and the
consumers of the petitioner's shop
has been attached with the nearest
dealer on the ground that the
Patna High Court CWJC No.13666 of 2017 dt.08-07-2025
aforesaid order has been passed by
the Respondent no.4 without any
consideration to the show- cause
filed by the petitioner in response to
the show-cause notice issued
against him.
(IV) For issuance of an appropriate
writ in the nature of MANDAMUS,
commanding and directing the
Respondent Authorities to restore
the license and supply of the
petitioner's shop which has been
terminated in most arbitrary and
unlawful manner.
(V) For issuance of any other
writ/writs, order/ orders, direction
/directions for which the writ
petitioner would be found entitled
under the facts and circumstances
of the case."
2. At the outset, the Learned Counsel
for the respondents draws the attention of this
Court to Rule 32 (vii) of the Bihar Targeted Public
Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.
3. For better appreciation of the facts
of the case, Rule 32 (vii) of the Bihar Targeted
Patna High Court CWJC No.13666 of 2017 dt.08-07-2025
Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 is
reproduced hereinbelow:
"32. (vii) The Principal
Secretary/ Secretary of the department
may call for the records related to the
order passed under the provisions of
this Order by the Divisional
Commissioner or the District Officer or
the licensing authority or the Sub
Divisional Officer suo moto or upon a
representation by someone, and if he
is satisfied that the Divisional
Commissioner or the District Officer or
the licensing authority or the Sub
Divisional Officer
(a) has exercised such
powers which are not entrusted to him,
(b) has exercised his
powers illegally without considering
the facts of the case,
(c) has failed in use of his
powers, he may pass an order which
he thinks fit."
4. Heard the Learned counsel for the
petitioner and the Learned counsel for the
respondents.
Patna High Court CWJC No.13666 of 2017 dt.08-07-2025
5. Taking into consideration, without going
into the merits or demerits of the case, that the
petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing a
representation before the Principal Secretary,
under Rule 32 (vii) of the Bihar Targeted Public
Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 against
the impugned orders, the writ petition is disposed
of with a direction to the petitioner to file the
representation within four weeks from the date of
receipt of this order before the Principal Secretary.
The delay in filing the representation, if any, shall
be condoned by the Principal Secretary, and the
authority shall dispose of the representation within
three months from the date of filing of the same.
6. It is needless to mention that before
passing any order, all the concerned parties shall
be put on notice and given an opportunity of
hearing. Any order passed shall be communicated
to the party.
7. With the above observations, the
present writ petition stands disposed of
8. Interlocutory Application(s), if any,
Patna High Court CWJC No.13666 of 2017 dt.08-07-2025
shall stand disposed of.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
Spd/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 09.07.2025
Transmission Date
