Patna High Court
Vinod KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The court held that the licensing authority had complied with the earlier order, so the contempt application was dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner filed a contempt application alleging that the licensing authority failed to comply with the High Court's order dated 23‑02‑2022 in CWJC No.21410 of 2021, which directed a positive decision on his license application within 60 days. The Division Bench had ordered the authority to consider the petitioner's application and communicate its decision within the stipulated period. The opposite parties produced a show‑cause memorandum indicating that a decision was taken on 27‑11‑2024 (Memo No.1291) and that the petitioner was asked to deposit a fee, thereby satisfying the court’s directions. Upon reviewing the material, the bench found that the licensing authority had indeed complied with the earlier order. Consequently, the court held that no contempt had occurred and disposed of the contempt application.
Issues considered
- Whether the licensing authority’s actions constitute contempt for non‑compliance of the High Court’s order dated 23‑02‑2022
- Whether the directions of the Division Bench requiring a positive decision within 60 days have been fulfilled
Subjects
- contempt
- writ jurisdiction
- licensing authority
- order compliance
- PDS license
- High Court
- civil procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2871 of 2024
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21410 of 2021
======================================================
Vinod Kumar, Son of Late Ram Dular Mukhiya, Resident of Village-Sirsiya,
P.S.-Hasanpur, District-Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Sri Dr. N Saravana Kumar, the Principal
Secretary, Department of Food and Consumer Protection, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
2. Sri Yogendra Singh, the District Magistrate, Samastipur,
3. Sri Mahmood Alam, the District Supply Officer, Samastipur.
4. Sri Akash Choudhary, the Sub Divisional Officer, Rosera, District -
Samastipur.
5. Sri Prithul Singh, the Block Supply Officer, Hasanpur, District - Samastipur.
6. Miss Honey Gupta, the Circle Officer, Hasanpur, Samastipur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mirityunjay Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Pampy Kumari, Advocate
Ms. Megha Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.Raja Ahmad, AAG-5
Mr. Md. Kamil Akhtar, AC to AAG-5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
2 20-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present contempt application has been filed
alleging non-compliance of the order dated 23.02.2022 passed
in CWJC No. 21410 of 2021.
3. The Division Bench, while disposing of the writ
petition, had issued the following directions:-
Patna High Court MJC No.2871 of 2024(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
“Under the aforesaid circumstances, we direct the
licensing authority to advert itself to the application
preferred by the petitioner, on the petitioner presenting
a copy of this order before such authority, and a
decision in that regard shall be taken positively within a
period of 60 days thereafter, which shall be
communicated to the petitioner.
4. A show cause has been filed on behalf of the
Opposite Party No. 5, wherein following statements have been
made in paragraph nos. 14 & 15:
“14. That it is stated that Five member District Level
Selection Committee headed by the District Magistrate,
Samastipur after going though the entire documents,
compassionate related checklist of the petitioner,
enquiry report of the B.S.O., Hasanpur as well as other
concerning papers unisonly decided on 25/11/2024 to
permit recommendation of the S.D.O., Rosera for
granting the PDS license to the petitioner on
compassionate ground vide Memo No. 1291/Supply
dated 27/11/2024.
15. That later on, the S.D.O., Rosera asked from the
petitioner to deposit requisite fee of Rs. 1000/- through
treasury chalan for granting license, affidavit regarding
correctness of submitted documents etc vide Memo No.
842/Supply dated 29/11/2024.”
5. Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits
that pursuant to the application made by the petitioner, a
decision has already been taken by the competent authority vide
Memo No. 1291dated 27/11/2024 (Annexure-R/G to the show
Patna High Court MJC No.2871 of 2024(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
cause).
6. In view of the aforesaid submission and upon
perusal of materials available on record, it appears that the
directions issued by the Division Bench have already been
complied with. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that no
further order is required to be passed in the present contempt
application.
7. Accordingly, the present contempt application
stands disposed of.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
(Shailendra Singh, J)
Sujit/-
U
Checking your session…