Patna High Court
Munna Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 7 October, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12894 of 2019
======================================================
Munna Kumar S/o Bhuneshwar Singh Resident of Village Jinoria, P.S.
Baghaila, Dist.Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary,Govt. of Bihar, Patna
2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
3. The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department,Govt. of Bihar,
Patna
4. The Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department,Govt.
of Bihar,Patna
5. The District Officer-cum-Collector, Dist.-Rohtas
6. The Sub-Divisional Officer,Sub Division, Rohtas
7. The District Supply Officer, Dist.-Rohtas
8. The Block Supply Officer, Block-Rajapur, Dist.Rohtas
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Prasad Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.S.Raza Ahmad (AAG-5)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 07-10-2025
1. The writ petition is filed for the following
relief:-
"For issuance of writ/writs of
certiorari appropriate in nature for
directing and commanding to the
respondents for issuance of P.D.S.
Licence in the name of the petitioner on
the basis of high marks in essential
educational certificate, for issuance of
Patna High Court CWJC No.12894 of 2019 dt.07-10-2025
P.D.S. licence as per guideline in
vacancy for Panchayat Siyachak, Block
Rajpur, District Rohtas who has fulfill
entire terms and condition for issuance
of P.D.S. Licence but the name of the
petitioner is mentioned at serial no. 3 in
provisional merit list and the name of
other applicant Deepak Kumar has been
published at serial no.1 in provisional
list, when the marks of the petitioner in
matriculation is 79% and marks of other
applicants is below to the petitioner,
after violation statutory rule 9 of Bihar
targeted Public Distribution System
(Control) Order 2016 the Provisional list
has been published by the authority."
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:
Patna High Court CWJC No.12894 of 2019 dt.07-10-2025
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.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12894 of 2019 dt.07-10-2025
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
complaint/application 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.12894 of 2019 dt.07-10-2025
complaint/application, the writ petition is disposed of
with a direction to the petitioner to file
complaint/application within one month from the
date of receipt of this order before the concerned
authority. The delay in filing the
complaint/application 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 observations, the Writ
petition shall stand disposed of.
8. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall
stand disposed of.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
vinita/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 09.10.2025
Transmission Date
