Patna High Court
Vijay Kumar Mishra vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 January, 2018
Author: Vikash Jain
Bench: Vikash Jain
Patna High Court CWJC No.17859 of 2017 dt.15-01-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17859 of 2017
===========================================================
Vijay Kumar Mishra, Son of Ramanak Mishra, Resident of Mohalla- Usha
Sadan, Budh Nagar Road No.02 Postal Park, Chiraiya Tar, P.S.- Kankarbagh,
District- Patna.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Food and Consumer
Protection Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Development Commissioner, Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.
4. District Certificate Officer, Sitamarhi.
5. The District Supply Officer, Sitamarhi.
6. The Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Patna through its
Managing Director.
7. The District Manager, Bihar State and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
Sitamarhi.
8. The Deputy Manager (Claim) S.F.C. Bihar, Patna.
.... .... Respondent/s
===========================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar Jha, Adv
For the BSFC Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Shahid Siddique, AC to AG5
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 15-01-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing of the proceeding of Certificate Case No. 7/2016-17 which has been filed for recovery of Rs. 65,45,991/-.
2. A supplementary affidavit has been filed, in para 2 whereof a specific stand has been taken that the petitioner never received the notice under Section 7 of the P.D.R. Act in Certificate Case No. 7/2016-17 and hence, continuance of the proceeding for recovery are wholly arbitrary and illegal.
Patna High Court CWJC No.17859 of 2017 dt.15-01-2018
3. Learned counsel for the respondent-State as well as learned counsel for the BSFC appear and have been heard.
4. Having regard to the nature of the grievance of the petitioner this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Certificate Officer, Sitamarhi (respondent no. 4) to serve the statutory notice under Section 7 of the PDR Act on the petitioner, if not already served, before proceeding further in the matter.
5. It is made clear that in case the stand of the petitioner denying service of notice under Section 7 of the PDR Act is found incorrect, the respondents shall be at liberty to approach this Court for recall of this judgment.
(Vikash Jain, J)
Chandran/BT
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading 16.01.2018
Date
Transmission NA
Date