Patna High Court
Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The court held that the petitioner must pursue the alternative remedy provided under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, and therefore dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
Vikash Kumar filed a writ petition challenging the selection of a private respondent over him for the position of PDS dealer in Gram Panchayat Raj Marar, alleging he was more qualified. The respondents relied on the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, which provides a specific appeal and revision mechanism for aggrieved persons. The court observed that the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy under the said Order and that the District Magistrate, who heads the selection committee, cannot entertain an appeal against his own order. Consequently, the court directed the petitioner to file a complaint/application before the Divisional Commissioner within one month, with the delay to be condoned, and ordered the authority to dispose of the matter within three months. The writ petition was therefore disposed without granting any writ relief.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 is available.
- Whether the limitation period for filing the statutory complaint can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 — s. 32(iii), 32(v), 32(vi)
- Limitation Act — s. 5
Subjects
- Public Distribution System
- Selection Procedure
- Writ Petition
- Certiorari
- Mandamus
- Alternative Remedy
- Limitation
- Administrative Law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16539 of 2019
======================================================
Vikash Kumar Son of Ramdeo Prasad Yadav Resident of Village- Navtoliya,
Post Office- Marar, Police Station- Morkahi, District-Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar.
2. The Commissioner Munger Division, Munger.
3. The District Magistrate Khagaria.
4. The District Supply Officer Khagaria.
5. The Sub- Divisional Officer Khagaria.
6. Raj Kumar Mandal Son of Surya Narayan Mandal Resident of Village-
Marar, Police Station Morkahi, Block- Khagaria, District- Khagaria.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. S.Raza Ahmad, AAG5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 30-06-2026
1. The Writ petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:
”(i). For issuance of writ in
the nature of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ to quash the
selection of Private Respondent in
place of petitioner for the P.D.S.
Dealer of Gram Panchayat Raj Marar
Uttari Block + District Khagaria, and
the petitioner has been deprived
from selection due to date of
issuance of Mark Sheet on
03.05.2018. It is matter of
consideration that the petitioner has
passed the Examination of Master of
Science and result Published on
12.08.2017. The Notification for
Patna High Court CWJC No. 16539 of 2019 dt.30-06-2026
2/5
P.D.S. Dealer Published on
22.11.2017. The petitioner is most
appropriate candidate for this post
under the qualification and the
prescribed guidelines issued by the
Government of Bihar for the P.D.S.
Dealer. But the selection Committee
failed to consider that the petitioner
is more qualified than the private
Respondent No.6 (Annexure-5)
(ii). For issuance of writ in
the nature of mandamus or any
other appropriate writ commanding
the Respondents to select the
petitioner for the P.D.S. Dealer of
Gram Panchayat Raj Marrar Uttari
and considered that the petitioner is
appropriate candidate among other
candidates applied for the P.D.S.
Dealer.
(iii). For issuance of any
other appropriate writ, order or
direction which your Lordships may
deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
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:
Patna High Court CWJC No. 16539 of 2019 dt.30-06-2026
3/5
“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 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
Patna High Court CWJC No. 16539 of 2019 dt.30-06-2026
4/5
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
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
Patna High Court CWJC No. 16539 of 2019 dt.30-06-2026
5/5
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.
8. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall
stand disposed of.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
Shanu/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.