High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Shyam Sunder Ram vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 30 March, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Shyam Sunder Ram vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 30 March, 2011
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                            CWJC No.6048 of 2006
           Shyam Sunder Ram S/O Sri Ram Chandra Ram, resident of village
           Post Baikunthpur, P.S.Raja Pakar, District Vaishali at Hajipur
                                    ...             ....                   Petitioner
                                    Versus
           1. The State Of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old
              Secretariat, Patna-1
           2. The Food Commissioner and Secretary Food, Supply &
              Commerce, Department, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat at Patna
           3. The Collector, Vaishali, District- Vaishali at Hajipur
           4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Mahua, District- Vaishali, at Hajipur
           5. The Block Development Officer, Rajapakar Block, District
              Vaishali
           6. The Block Supply Officer, Rajapakar Block, District Vaishali at
              Hajipur          ...                ....                 Respondents
                                   -----------

For the Petitioner :Mr. Aditya Narayan, Advocate
For the State :Mr. Binit Kumar, A.C. to G.A.-9

03/ 30.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner

and the State.

2. By filing this writ petition, petitioner

desires that his case be considered for appointment

as PDS Dealer. For such purpose, petitioner filed

application dated 13.10.2004, Annexure-1.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the

petitioner that till date application dated 13.10.2004,

Annexure-1 for appointment as PDS Dealer has not

been considered by the authorities.

4. Counsel for the State, with reference to
2

the averments made in the counter affidavit duly

affirmed by the Acting Marketing Officer dated

28.6.2006, states that case of the petitioner for

appointment as PDS Dealer was considered but as

he was minor on the relevant date, he was not

granted PDS licence. In addition it is submitted that

father of the petitioner is also a Thela Vender and

two persons in a family cannot be allowed to

become agent of the Government for the purpose of

distribution of commodity.

5. In rejoinder, counsel for the petitioner

submitted that area of operation of the father of the

petitioner is different from the area for which

request has been made by the petitioner for grant of

PDS licence.

6. Aforesaid submissions have been noted

so as to enable the authorities to consider the same

while considering the request of the petitioner

contained in the application dated 13.10.2004,

Annexure-1 and thereafter to pass a reasoned order

either granting/ refusing PDS licence to the

petitioner. Appropriate orders in this regard be
3

passed by the Licensing Authority in accordance

with law, as early as possible, in any case within

two months from the date of receipt/ production of a

copy of this order.

7. The writ petition is, accordingly,

disposed of.

Arjun/                                   ( V. N. Sinha, J.)