IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19871 of 2018

======================================================

Ashok Kumar Yadav S/o Anil Yadav, Resident of Village- English, P.S.-

Paranpur, District- Katihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Food & Consumer Protection

Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Chairman, District Level Selection Committee, District- Katihar.

3.

The Collector-Cum-District- Magistrate, Katihar.

4.

The District Supply Officer, Katihar.

5.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Katihar.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. N.K.Agrawal, Sr. Adv.

Mr.Dhananjaya Nath Tiwari, Adv.

For the State

:

Mr. Alok Ranjan, AC to AAG-5

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH

ORAL ORDER

4

04-02-2021

The present writ petition has been filed

challenging the order dated 18.12.2017 passed by

the PDS District Level Selection Committee, Katihar

Sadar, Block-Paranpur, Katihar by which the

application of the petitioner for grant of PDS

licence has been rejected on the ground that in

Ward No. 10 already there is a PDS dealer.

The learned Senior Counsel for the

petitioner, Sri N.K.Agrawal, has raised various

issues and has submitted that the application of

the petitioner was considered and his case was

Patna High Court CWJC No.19871 of 2018(4) dt.04-02-2021

2/3

recommended for the purposes of grant of PDS

licence, however, subsequently, it has been

reviewed illegally and now, the respondents have

sought to disallow the grant of PDS licence to the

petitioner. The learned Senior Counsel for the

petitioner has further submitted that there is no

restriction on the appointment of two PDS dealers

in one ward.

Per contra, the learned counsel for the State

has submitted that already, there is one PDS

dealer in the ward in question, hence, upon the

same having come to the notice of the

respondents, the case of the petitioner for grant of

PDS dealer was disallowed.

This Court finds that the present writ

petition involves disputed question of facts, which

are required to be adjudicated, hence, it would be

appropriate that the matter be decided by the

Divisional Commissioner, Purnea.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances

of the case and with the consent of the parties, I

deem it fit and proper to grant liberty to the

Patna High Court CWJC No.19871 of 2018(4) dt.04-02-2021

3/3

petitioner

to

approach

the

Divisional

Commissioner, Purnea with regard to the issue in

question by filing appropriate representation within

a period of three weeks from today, which shall be

decided in accordance with law by the Divisional

Commissioner, Purnea within a period of six weeks

thereafter, after giving adequate opportunity of

personal hearing to the petitioner.

It is needless to state that the petitioner

shall be free to raise such grounds as he may

deem fit and proper, in the representation to be

filed before the Divisional Commissioner, Purnea.

The writ petition stands disposed of on the

aforesaid terms.

Ajay/-

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)

U