Patna High Court
Sanjay Kumar Singh vs The Bihar State Food And Civil Supply ... on 9 May, 2025
Author: A. Abhishek Reddy
Bench: A. Abhishek Reddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11390 of 2024
======================================================
Sanjay Kumar Singh Son of Sri Bir Bahadur Singh, resident of Dilawarpur
Govardhan, Police Station-Bidupur, District-Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation Khadya Bhawan,
Daroga Rai Path, R. Block, Road No. 2, Patna through its Managing
Director.
2. The Managing Director, The Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation,
Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Rai Path, R. Block, Road No. 2, Patna.
3. The General Manager (Modernization), The Bihar State Food and Civil
Supply Corporation, Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Rai Path, R. Block, Road No.
2, Patna.
4. Deputy General Manager (Modernization), The Bihar State Food and Civil
Supply Corporation, Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Rai Path, R. Block, Road No.
2, Patna.
5. The District Manager, Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation Ltd.,
Vaishali.
6. The IT Manager 4 (G), The Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation,
Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Rai Path, R. Block, Road No. 2, Patna.
7. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
8. The District Magistrate, Vaishali.
9. The Block Supply Officer, Goraul, District-Vaishali.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Adv.
: Mr. Ujjawal Bhushan, Adv.
For BSFC : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Adv.
: Mrs. Shipli Singh, Adv.
: Mr. Utkarsh Utpal, Adv.
: Mr. Ayush Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel (8)
: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to SC8
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 09-05-2025
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed for the following
relief(s):-
Patna High Court CWJC No.11390 of 2024 dt.09-05-2025
2/6
"(I) For quashing the office order
contained in memo no. 1318 dated 17.02.2024 issued
under the signature of the General Manager
(Modernization) Bihar State Food & Civil Supply
Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter to be referred as
corporation), whereby and where under it has been
directed to recover five times of the market rate of the
deviated food grains carried through Truck No.
BR31GA0981 from the petitioner without appreciating
the fact that the food grains in question had reached
its destination without any shortage and the concerned
dealer has distributed the same to the beneficiaries.
The deviation of the food carried through Truck No.
grained BR31GA0981, mentioned in the impugned
order has been alleged due to some discrepancy in the
tracking device, which happened due to glitch in
network and the same is quite common and beyond the
control of the petitioner.
(II) For quashing the consequential office
order contained in memo no. 332 dated 04.03.2024
and letter no. 780 dated 26.06.2024 issued under the
signature of District Manager, Vaishali whereby
former the petitioner has been directed to deposit a
penalty of Rs. 25,49,675/- for alleged deviation of food
grain carried vide truck no. BR31GA0981 and by later
the petitioner has been reminded to deposit the said
amount within three days.
(III) for directing the respondent
corporation to release the amount of Earnest Money
Deposit (EMD) to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/- and
further direct them to pay the pending bill to the tune
of Rs. 19,88,884/-, which are being withheld
arbitrarily since the tenure of the petitioner as
Transport Contractor, Door Step Delivery (DSD) has
come to end on January 2024 after granting extension
twice.
(IV) For any other relief/reliefs, this
Hon'ble Court may find fit and proper, in the facts and
circumstances of the present case."
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has been
entrusted with the work of transporting the food grains under the
Door Step Delivery scheme (DSD).
Patna High Court CWJC No.11390 of 2024 dt.09-05-2025
3/6
4. Learned counsel has stated that the petitioner has been
doing his work without any complaint from any quarters. That on
17.02.2024
vide Memo No. 1318, the petitioner has received the
impugned order imposing five times penalty for deviation of the
designated routes. Learned counsel has stated that the food grains
which were given to the petitioner were delivered at the designated
places and there was absolutely no deviation of the route as
alleged. Learned counsel has stated that the due to the mal
functioning of the tracking device, the authorities were under the
mistaken impression that the petitioner had deviated the routes.
Learned counsel has stated that there is no allegation of any
misappropriation of the grains or that the grains were delivered
late. That the delivery of the goods were within the time limit and
the grains were delivered intact at the place of destination. That
there is no justification by the authorities for imposing five times
penalty on the petitioner. Learned counsel has stated that the
authorities have deducted the penalty amount from the transport
bills of the petitioner and, therefore, a direction may be given to
the authorities to refund the same. Learned counsel for the
petitioner has relied on the judgments passed by this Hon'ble
Court in CWJC No. 4178 of 2020 dated 19.02.2024 & LPA No.
454 of 2024 dated 03.12.2024.
Patna High Court CWJC No.11390 of 2024 dt.09-05-2025
5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the respondents has vehemently opposed the very maintainability
of the present writ petition and stated that the petitioner may
approach the MD for redressal of his grievance by way of a
representation/ appeal. Further, it is stated by the counsel for the
respondent that the petitioner has already filed a representation
before the Managing Director and therefore, the present writ
petition is not maintainable. Learned counsel has stated that the
impugned order is in consonance with the terms and conditions of
the agreement entered between the parties and there is no illegality
or perversity in the impugned order. Learned counsel has
therefore, for dismissing the present CWJC.
6. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the
authorities have imposed the penalty of five times on the ground
that the petitioner has deviated the route. Admittedly in this case,
the petitioner was entrusted with the work of transporting the
grains to the four FPS. It is not denied by the authorities that the
said delivery of the grains was within the time and that there was
no shortage in the delivery of the grains which were entrusted to
the petitioner, the only allegation against the petitioner is that he
has taken a deviation of the route. The contention of the petitioner
that there was a malfunction in the GPS tracking device and,
Patna High Court CWJC No.11390 of 2024 dt.09-05-2025
therefore, the movement of the vehicle was not recorded and the
authorities appeared to be under the impression that there was
deviation in the route appears to be true and plausible. Further, it is
to be noted that it is not the case of the authorities that the
petitioner had taken any extra time for delivering the grains, the
goods were delivered on the same day as evident from the
statement of the four FPS dealers.
7. This Hon'ble Court in CWJC No. 4178 of 2020 dated
19.02.2024 has held as under;
"That even in respect of administrative order, the
giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good
administration. In Alexander Machinery (Dudley) Ltd. v.
Crabtree, (1974) LCR 120 : 1974 IRL P 56, it was observed
as follows :
" Failure to give reasons amounts
to denial of justice". Reasons are live links
between the mind of the decision taker to the
controversy in question and the decision or
conclusion arrived at". Reasons substitute
subjectivity by objectivity. The emphasis on
recording reasons is that if the decision reveals
the "inscrutable face of the sphinx", it can, by
its silence, render it virtually impossible for the
Courts to perform their appellate function or
exercise the power of judicial review in
adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to
reason is an indispensable part of a sound
judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to
indicate an application of mind to the matter
before Court. Another rationale is that the
affected party can know why the decision has
gone against him. One of the salutary
requirements of natural justice is spelling out
reasons for the order made, in other words, a
speaking out. the "inscrutable face of a sphinx"
Patna High Court CWJC No.11390 of 2024 dt.09-05-2025
is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or
quasi-judicial performance.""
8. Further, this Hon'ble Court in LPA No. 454 of 2024
dated 03.12.2024 has held as under;
"9. The inquiry conducted by the
Corporation itself indicated that there was no
fault in the GPS and that it was due to the
weak signal, that the vehicle had gone offline
on many occasions. True, if there is any
tampering with the GPS itself, then there could
be a penalty imposed, but even in such
circumstances, it cannot be related to the value
of the goods, when it has been proved that
there is no pilferage of goods and the entire
goods transported has been off-loaded at the
site of the PDS distributor or the godown of the
Corporation itself."
9. Having regard to the same, the impugned orders dated
17.02.2024, 04.03.2024 & 26.06.2024 are set aside, the authorities
are directed to refund the amounts deducted towards the five times
penalty as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of
eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10. With the above direction, the present writ petition
stands allowed to the extent indicated above.
(A. Abhishek Reddy, J)
Ayush/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 15.05.2025.
Transmission Date NA
