High CourtsDivision Bench

Ragni Kumari vs State Of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 4 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 PAT CK 0004

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Karol, CJ · S. Kumar, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6959 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

34 paragraphs · 543 words

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-

“1(I) For issuance of writ of mandamus and any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, directions to make an enquiry of entire selection process

of PDS dealer of selected in Barhi Panchayat, Ward no.-6, Prakhand-Jaynagar, District-Madhubani and then pass an appropriate order with respect

to illegal selection of Respondent no.-6 and select the petitioner as a bonafide candidate.

(II) For setting aside the selection of PDS dealer of Private Respondent no.-6 who is selected vide order dated 5.10.2018 in the light of advertisement

published in Bihar Gazette dated 14.3.2016 issued by the Department of Food and consumer Protection Department, Government of Bihar, Patna,

being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and without following the norms of selection.

(III) For cancelation of the entire selection process of PDS dealer of Village-Barahi, Panchayat-Barhi, Block- Rajnagar, Sub-division-Jaynagar under

District- Madhubani and direction to select the petitioner being an eligible candidates.

(IV) To direct the respondent authority to dispose of the Appeal filed by the petitioner on 8.11.2019 bearing Appeal no.

(V) For any other appropriate order/orders as your lordship may.â€​

After the matter was heard for some time, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, under instructions, states that petitioner may be

permitted to prefer an appeal against the impugned order before the Appellate Authority.

Permission granted.

Learned counsel for the respondents states that if such an appeal is preferred within a period of four weeks from today, the issue of limitation, if any,

shall neither be raised nor allowed to come in the way of adjudication of the appeal on merits.

Statement accepted and taken on record.

As such, petition stands disposed of in the following mutually agreeable terms:-

(a) Petitioner is permitted to prefer an appeal within a period of four weeks from today;

(b) In the event of appeal being preferred within a period of four weeks from today, the issue of limitation shall not come in the way of adjudication of

the appeal on merits;

(c) Opportunity shall be granted to the parties to place on record all essential documents and materials, if so required and desired;

(d) Petitioner through learned counsel undertakes to fully cooperate and not take unnecessary adjournment;

(e) The Appellate Authority shall decide the appeal on merits, in compliance of the principles of natural justice;

(f) The Appellate Authority shall pass a reasoned and speaking order, within a period of six months from the date of filing of the appeal;

(g) Copy of the reasoned and speaking order passed by the Appellate Authority shall be supplied to the parties;

(h) Equally, liberty reserved to the parties to take recourse to such other remedies as are otherwise available in accordance with law;

(i) We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law, before the appropriate forum, the

same shall be dealt with, in accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch;

(j) We have not expressed any opinion on merits and all issues are left open;

(k) Liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the order, before the appropriate forum, if required and desired.

The instant petition sands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Interlocutory Application(s), if any, stands disposed of.