Patna High Court
Sunita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar on 14 October, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14519 of 2019
======================================================
Sunita Kumari W/o Sukhendra Kumar Resident of Parsawan Kala, Parsawan
Kalan, P.o. and P.s.- Gurua, Distt.- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
2. The District Magistrate Gaya
3. The Sub-Divisional Officer Sherghati, Gaya
4. The District Food Supply Officer Gaya
5. Manngo Kumari W/o Vinary Kumar Vill.- Bdauna, P.o. and P.s.- Gurua,
Distt.- Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shama Sinha, Advocate
: Mr. Surya Prakash, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Arvind Ujjwal (Sc4)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 14-10-2025
1. The present Writ petition is filed for the
following reliefs:-
"I. To issue an appropriate
writ/order/direction in the nature of
certiorari for for quashing the selection of
Respondent no.5 as Fair Price Dealer
under the Public Distribution System in
pursuant to the memo no.
410/supply/Sherghati/dated 21.09.2017
for Block Guruaa, Panchayat-Tubba,
Village Gullani, who being ineligible for
selection, has been selected illegally by
Patna High Court CWJC No.14519 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
rejecting the application of the Petitioner
inspite of her having higher marks qua
respondent no. 5.
II. To issue an appropriate
writ/order/direction in the nature of
Mandamus commanding the Respondents
to select the Petitioner as Fair Price
Dealer under the Public Distribution
system in pursuant to the memo no.
410/supply/Sherghati/dated 21.09.2017
for Block Guruaa, Panchayat-Tubba,
Village - Gullani, as the Petitioner is
eligible for the appointment and more
suitable for selection, having higher
marks than the selected candidate
(Respondent no.5).
III. To issue an appropriate
writ/order/direction in the nature of
Mandamus commanding the Respondents
to hold an enquiry into the irregularities
committed in the selection of the Fair
Price Dealers under the Public
Distribution system in pursuant to memo
no.410/supply/Sherghati/dated21.9.2017.
IV. To any other relief or reliefs for
which the Petitioner is found to be
entitled in the facts and circumstances of
the case.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14519 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
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
other party under sub-clause (4) or until
the appeal is disposed of, whichever is
earlier.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14519 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
(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.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14519 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
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
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.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14519 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
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)
amitkr/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 16.10.2025
Transmission Date N/A
