AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner has filed the Writ petition for the following reliefs:
“(a)For grant of an appropriate writ for quashing the order dated 20.06.2023 passed by the Divisional Commissioner Patna in B.T.P.D.S Control Revision No. 57/2023 dismissing the Revision filed by the petitioner (Annex-7).
(b)For grant of an appropriate writ for quashing the order dated 29.01.2019 passed by the District Magistrate Nalanda in Supply Appeal No. 14/2015 Dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner (Annexure-5).
(c)For grant of an appropriate writ for quashing the order dated 16.07.2013 contained in memo no. 535/Aa passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate Hilsa (Nalanda) by which the petitioner was terminated from the post of P.D.S Dealer and his licence was cancelled (Annexure-3).
(d)For grant of an appropriate writ for a direction to the respondent to allow the petitioner on the post of P.D.S Dealer at Panchayat Berthu with all consequential benefits.”
At the outset, the Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to Rule 32 (vii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.
For better appreciation of the facts of the case, Rule 32 (vii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 is reproduced hereinbelow:
“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 as well as the Learned counsel for the respondents.
Without going into the merits or demerits of the case, and having regard to the fact that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious 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 of by granting liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the Principal Secretary challenging the order of the Revisional/Appellate Authority as well as the order of cancellation within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order. On such representation being made, the Principal Secretary shall pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter.
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. 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.