AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner has filed the Writ petition for the following reliefs:
“i)To issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order/direction for quashing order dated 15.06.2023 passed in BTPDS Control Revision No.140 of 2022 passed by respondent no.7-The Divisional Commissioner, Patna whereby and whereunder the Revision Application made by the petitioner was rejected.
(ii)To issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ/order/ direction for quashing order dated 28.05.2019 passed by respondent no.3-The Sub-Divisional Officer, Bihar Sharif whereby and where under the Public Distribution System License (PDS) ofthe petitioner, being License No.42/16, for Gram Panchayat-Tungi, was cancelled with immediate effect.
(iii)To issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ/order/ direction for quashing order dated 04.02.2021 passed in Supply Case No.19 of 2019 (Dharam Dew Choudhary v. State) by the respondent no.2- The District Magistrate, Nalanda, whereby and where under the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the aforesaid order dated 28.05.2019 of the Sub Divisional Officer, Bihar Sharif was dismissed.
(iv)To issue appropriate writ/order/direction, directing the respondents to immediately restore the PDS license of the petitioner for panchayat-Tungi, block-Bihar Sharif being License No.42/16.
(v)To issue appropriate writ/order/direction, for renewal of the PDS license of the petitioner after accepting fee for it.”
The petitioner has earlier filed Writ Petition bearing CWJC No. 11176 of 2021 for quashing of the relief as prayed for in paragraph Nos. 1 (ii) and (iii) of this Writ petition. A Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.03.2022 has dismissed the Writ petition with liberty to the the petitioner to avail the remedy of revision by making an application before the Revisional Authority. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner preferred a revision, which was dismissed vide order dated 15.06.2023. The petitioner has now approached this Court challenging the revisional order dated 15.06.2023, as well as the orders dated 28.05.2019 and 04.02.2021.
At the outset, the Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has drawn the attention of the Court to Rule 32(vii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, which provides for exercise of revisional/supervisory jurisdiction by the Principal Secretary/Secretary of the Department in the circumstances specified therein.
For better appreciation of the facts of the case, Rule 32 (vii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 reads as under:
“32.(vii) The Principal Secretary/ Secretary of the department may call for the records related to the order passed under the provisions of this Order by the Divisional Commissioner or the District Officer or the licensing authority or the Sub Divisional Officer suo moto or upon a representation by someone, and if he is satisfied that the Divisional Commissioner or the District Officer or the licensing authority or the Sub Divisional Officer
(a)has exercised such powers which are not entrusted to him,
(b)has exercised his powers illegally without considering the facts of the case,
(c)has failed in use of his powers, he may pass an order which he thinks fit.”
Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner and the Learned counsel for the respondents.
Without going into the merits or demerits of the case, having regard to the fact that the petitioner has an alternative and effective remedy of filing a representation before the Principal Secretary, under Rule 32 (vii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 against the impugned order. The present writ petition is disposed off granting liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the Principal Secretary challenging the order of the Revisional/Appellate Authority and order of cancellation withing a period of two months from today. On such representation being made, the Principal Secretary shall pass necessary orders strictly in accordance with law.
Further, if there is any delay in preferring the representation, the authority shall liberally construe the limitation period as the petitioner has approached this Court within time.
It is needless to mention that before passing any order the petitioner shall be put on notice and given an opportunity of hearing. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation. Any order passed shall be communicated to the party.
With the above observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of
Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.