Patna High Court
John Pascal,versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The High Court held that the petitioner must avail the alternative statutory remedy by filing a representation before the Divisional Commissioner, and therefore the writ petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, John Pascal, challenged the cancellation of his 1987 license under the Public District System by seeking a writ of certiorari to quash orders dated 30‑08‑2013 and 13‑07‑2018. The respondents argued that the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 provides a specific appeal and revision mechanism, which the petitioner had not utilized. The Court observed that the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy to file an appeal before the District Magistrate, and because the District Magistrate is the head of the selection committee, the appropriate forum is a complaint before the Divisional Commissioner. The petitioner also sought condonation of the limitation period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, but the Court directed him to pursue the representation within one month, with the authority to condone delay. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was instructed to follow the statutory procedure.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 exists.
- Whether the limitation period for filing a representation can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
- Whether the District Magistrate can entertain an appeal against his own licensing order.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 — s. 32(iii), 32(v), 32(vi)
- Limitation Act — s. 5
Subjects
- certiorari
- public distribution system
- licensing
- appeal
- revision
- limitation
- administrative law
- alternative remedy
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20935 of 2019
======================================================
John Pascal, Son of Late Pascal Liyopold, Resident of Village-Relly Bazar
Ramnagar, Police Station-Ramnagar, District-West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar.
2. The District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah.
3. The District Supply Officer, West Champaran, Bettiah.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer cum Licensing Officer, Bagaha, District-West
Champaran.
5. The Block Supply Officer, Ramnagar, District-West Champaran.
6. The Anchal Adhikari, Ramnagar, District-West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Brij Kishor Mishra
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Arvind Ujjwal (Sc4)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA
CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-06-2026
1. The Writ petition is filed for following
reliefs:
“For issuance of a writ in the
nature of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ or writs for
quashing the order dated
13.07.2018 passed by the
respondent no.2 in Case No. C.M.R.
402 of 2017-18 vide which he has
dismissed the appeal filed by the
petitioner against the order dated
30.08.2013 passed by the
respondent no.4 in Record Case
Patna High Court CWJC No.20935 of 2019 dt.22-06-2026
2/5
No.07 of 2013 and also for
quashing the order dated
30.08.2013 passed by the
respondent no.4 in Record Case
No.07 of 2013 vide which has been
cancelled the License No.01 of
1987 of the petitioner granted
under Public District System.”
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
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
Patna High Court CWJC No.20935 of 2019 dt.22-06-2026
3/5
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.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.20935 of 2019 dt.22-06-2026
4/5
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 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
representation 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
representation, the Writ petition is disposed of with
Patna High Court CWJC No.20935 of 2019 dt.22-06-2026
5/5
a direction to the petitioner to file representation
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
the authority concerned, and the authority shall
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
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.