Facts
The petitioner, a Fair Price Shop owner, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dumraon, to either return or adjust an amount of ₹75,000/- deposited for the supply of food grains under the Antoday and PHH Schemes for the period July to November 2017
Source reference: p. 1-2The petitioner alleged that the authorities were neither adjusting this amount nor supplying food grains against it, instead requiring fresh deposits for supplies since October 2019
Source reference: p. 2The respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition due to the existence of an alternative statutory remedy
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable despite the availability of an alternative statutory remedy under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016
Source reference: p. 32. Whether the Court can direct the appellate authority to condone the limitation period for filing an appeal
Source reference: p. 3Law Applied
Section 32(iii) of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, which provides that any person aggrieved by an order of the licensing authority (regarding license issuance, renewal, or cancellation) may appeal to the District Officer within thirty days
Source reference: p. 2-3Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, regarding the power of authorities to condone delays in filing appeals
Source reference: p. 3Reasoning
The Court observed that the reliefs sought by the petitioner fell within the scope of the statutory framework governing Public Distribution System dealers in Bihar.
Source reference: p. 3Since Section 32(iii) of the 2016 Order provides a specific domestic forum for grievances related to the licensing authority’s actions, the Court determined that the petitioner must exhaust this alternative remedy before invoking writ jurisdiction
Source reference: p. 3Regarding the petitioner's concern that the limitation period for such an appeal had already lapsed, the Court exercised its discretion to ensure the petitioner was not left remediless due to the time spent pursuing the writ petition
Source reference: p. 3-4Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition without adjudicating on merits, holding that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal
The Court directed the petitioner to file an appeal before the concerned District Magistrate within four weeks... [and] further ordered the District Magistrate to condone the delay in filing and to dispose of the appeal on its merits within a period of three months from the date of filing
Source reference: p. 3-4Original Court PDF
Nijammuddin AnsarivsThe State of Bihar
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in