Patna High Court
Anshu PriyadarshiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner must pursue the alternative remedy provided by the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 and therefore the writ petition cannot be entertained.
Summary
Anshu Priyadarshi filed a writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash a District Magistrate order granting a PDS shop licence to Aman Kumar, who allegedly failed to produce an unemployment certificate, and also sought mandamus directing issuance of a licence to himself. The respondents contended that the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 provides an appeal and revision mechanism, making the writ petition an alternative remedy. The Court observed that the petitioner must first file a complaint/application before the Divisional Commissioner under the same Order, as the District Magistrate cannot review his own order. Although the petitioner claimed the limitation period for filing such a complaint had lapsed, the Court directed that the delay be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed with a direction to file the statutory complaint within one month, and the authority was instructed to decide it within three months.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 that bars the writ petition.
- Whether the limitation period for filing the complaint before the Divisional Commissioner can be condoned.
- Whether the writ court can grant certiorari or mandamus in lieu of the statutory appeal/revision process.
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
- PDS shop licence
- Writ petition
- Certiorari
- Mandamus
- Alternative statutory remedy
- Limitation Act
- Administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18019 of 2019
======================================================
Anshu Priyadarshi S/o Late Indradeo Paswan Resident of Village Nanhku
Mandal Tola,P.S. Muffasil, Dist.Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Food and Supply
Department,Bihar,Patna
2. The Divisional Commissioner,Munger Division,Munger.
3. The District Magistrate, Khagaria
4. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Khagaria
5. The District Supply Officer, Khagaria
6. The Sub-divisional Officer, Khagaria
7. Aman Kumar S/o Prabhu Das Resident of Village Nanhku Mandal Tola, P.S.
Muffasil, Dist.Khagaria
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Arvind Ujjwal (SC4)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 24-06-2026
1. The present Writ petition is filed for the
following reliefs:-
(i) For issuance of any
appropriate writ or writs, rule or
direction especially in the nature
of certiorari, quashing the order
dated 10.02.2019 passed by the
learned District Magistrate,
Khagaria whereby and where
under it has been decided to issue
license for PDS shop to the private
respondent no. 7, namely Aman
Kumar even who has failed to
produced unemployment
Patna High Court CWJC No.18019 of 2019 dt.24-06-2026
2/5
certificate before the respondent
concerned.
(ii) For issuance of any
appropriate writ or writs, rule or
direction especially in the nature
of mandamus directing the
respondent to issue license of PDS
shop under
district/block/panchayat code no.
KHKRMY-SC under the district of
Khagaria as he has fulfilled entire
terms and conditions laid down for
issuance of PDS license.
(iii) For issuance of any
appropriate writ or writs, rule or
directions as your lordships may
deem fit and proper to the facts
and circumstances of the case as
well as for which the petitioner
may be found entitled thereto.
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:
“32 (iii). Any person
aggrieved by an order of the
licensing authority denying the
Patna High Court CWJC No.18019 of 2019 dt.24-06-2026
3/5
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.”
(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.
Patna High Court CWJC No.18019 of 2019 dt.24-06-2026
4/5
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
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
Patna High Court CWJC No.18019 of 2019 dt.24-06-2026
5/5
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.
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)
AMANDEEP/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 24.06.2026.
Transmission Date
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.