Patna High Court
Harinandan Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 14 October, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12379 of 2019
======================================================
Harinandan Yadav Son of Shri Triveni Yadav Resident of Vilalge-Barhara
Ward no.4 Darhar Panchayat P.S.-Nauhatta Dist-Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer
Protection Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. Commissionar, Koshi Division, Saharsa
4. The District Magistrate, Cum Chairman Selection Committee Saharsa.
5. The District Supply Officer, Saharsa.
6. The S.D.O., Saharsa Sadar.
7. The Circle Officer, Nauhatta Block, Dist.-Saharsa
8. The Block Supply Officer Nauhatta Dist-Saharsa
9. Rahul Kumar Son of Baidyanath Prasad Gupta Resident of Mohall-
Gandhipath Ward no.08 House no.125 P.S.-Saharsa Dist.-Saharsa
10. Rajiv Ranjan Son of Late Khushilal Yadav Resident of Mohalla-Simraha
Ward no. 35 House no.10 P.S.-Saharsa.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Arvind Ujjwal (SC-4)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 14-10-2025
1. The writ petition is filed for the following
reliefs:-
"(i) For issuance of writ of
dated 08.03.2019 issued by Respondent
No. 6, SDO, Saharsa whereby and
whereunder the SDO, Saharsa has
Patna High Court CWJC No.12379 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
directed to the selected candidate for
submit their Educational qualification as
well as relevant documents who were
selected for the licence for PDS shop in
different Panchayat in Nauhatta Block
namely Rahul Kumar was selected for the
licence for PDS Shop in Barhar village
Ward No. 3 under Darhar Panchayat Block
Nauhatta District Saharsa.
(ii) For issuance of Writ of
Mandamus for stay the selection for
licence of PDS Shop in Barhara Village
Panchayat Darhar Block Nauhatta District
Saharsa in favour of Rahul Kumar
Respondet No. 9.
(iii) For issuance of writ in the
nature of Mandamus directing the
respondents that stay the functioning of
the above mentioned allocation of PDS
Shop forthwith.
(iv.) For grant of any other relief
or reliefs which the petitioner may be
found entitled by this Hon'ble Court."
2. At this juncture, the Learned counsel for
the respondents contended that Section 32(iii) of the
Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control)
Patna High Court CWJC No.12379 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
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.
(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
Patna High Court CWJC No.12379 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
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.
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
Patna High Court CWJC No.12379 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
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. It is needless to mention that
before passing any order the petitioner should be
given a fair opportunity for hearing.
7. With the above said observation, the Writ
petition is disposed of.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12379 of 2019 dt.14-10-2025
8. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall
stand disposed of.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
Manish/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 16.10.2025
Transmission Date
