Patna High Court
Chintu Kumar PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The writ petition is not maintainable because the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious statutory appeal under Clause 32(3) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.
Summary
The petitioner, Chintu Kumar Paswan, filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court challenging actions of several state officials related to the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System. The petitioner sought relief from the court, alleging violations of his rights under the distribution system. The court observed that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious statutory remedy – an appeal to the District Magistrate‑cum‑Collector under Clause 32(3) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. Consequently, the High Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable when a specific statutory appeal is available. The court directed the petitioner to file the appeal within two weeks and ordered the authorities to hear him and decide the matter within eight weeks, after which the writ petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative statutory appeal under Clause 32(3) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 is available
- Whether the High Court can entertain the petition in spite of the existence of a specific remedial provision
Subjects
- writ petition
- public distribution system
- statutory appeal
- administrative law
- jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3119 of 2025
======================================================
Chintu Kumar Paswan, Son of Late Rajkumar Paswan, Resident of Village-
Kushdih, P.S.- Dumariya, District- Gaya, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and
Civil Supply, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, District Selection Committee, Gaya.
3. The Licensing Authority-cum-Sub Divisional Officer, Sherghati, Gaya.
4. The District Supply Officer, Gaya.
5. The Block Supply Officer, Dumariya, Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md. Jubair Ansari, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel (25)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
7 05-02-2026 Even though, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioner has argued at length on merits of the case, this
Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition,
having regard to the facts that the petitioner has an alternative
and efficacious remedy of preferring a statutory appeal before
the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Gaya, under Clause 32(3)
of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control)
Order, 2016. The present writ petition is disposed of directing
the petitioner to approach the District Magistrate-cum-Collector,
Gaya (Respondent No. 2) by way of appeal within a period of
two weeks from today. On such appeal being filed, the District
Patna High Court CWJC No.3119 of 2025(7) dt.05-02-2026
2/2
Magistrate-cum-Collector, Gaya (Respondent No. 2) shall
consider the same on merits and pass a reasoned orders in
accordance with law.
2. It is needless to mention that before passing any
order, the authorities concerned shall give an opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be completed
as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight
weeks from the date of filing of the appeal by the petitioner.
Any order passed shall be communicated to the parties.
3. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands
disposed of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Bhardwaj/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.