IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13909 of 2010 SARDAR KUNDAN SINGH, S/o late Sardar Pyara Singh, resident of Gerabari Bazar, P.S.Korha, District- Katihar…. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Principal Secretary-cum- Commissioner, Department of Food & Consumer Protection, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The District Magistrate-cum- Collector, Katihar 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Katihar 4. The District Supply Officer, Katihar…. Respondents ----------- For the petitioner: Mr.S.D. Sanjay, Advocate Mr.Akash Chaturvedi,Advocate For Respondents: Mr.G.P.9 Mr.Alok Ranjan, J.C. to G.P.9 ---- 2. 30.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner seeks quashing of the decision dated 26.2.2009 taken by the District Selection Committee, Katihar, by which the petitioner’s application for issuance of a licence for Thela Vendor of Kerosene oil on compassionate ground has been rejected. The facts of this case are within a limited compass and not in dispute. The petitioner’s father was a Thela Vendor of Kerosene Oil, who died on 25.8.1991. On 19.9.1996, the State Government issued a Circular in which it was stated that the heirs of all the Thela Vendors who had died suddenly while they were working as such, should be given licence for Thela Vendor of - 2 - Kerosen Oil on compassionate ground after obtaining the permission of the Department. The petitioner claiming to be the eldest son of his late father admittedly applied for the licence on compassionate ground on 8.12.2006. After due enquiry, his application was recommended and forwarded to the District Selection Committee but the District Selection Committee in its meeting held on 22.12.2008 rejected his application. In the rejection order, the District Selection Committee after noting the factual matrix also took note of the fact that there is no time limit prescribed in the Departmental Circular for receiving such application for grant of licence on compassionate ground to the dependent of the deceased Thela Vendor and, therefore, it decided to follow the principle laid down in clause 2.5 of the Public Distribution System Control Order, 2001 under which the period of two years for such application has been prescribed. For the said reasons, it was held that the application filed by the petitioner is time barred and it was recommended that his application should not be entertained and, accordingly, the same was rejected. - 3 - Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no time limit having been prescribed in the Government Circular dated 19.9.1996, it was not open to the District Selection Committee to have taken into consideration the time limit prescribed in the P.D.S. Control Order,2001 and for the said reason, the impugned order dated 26.2.2009 is illegal and fit to be quashed. On a consideration of the reasons mentioned in the impugned order, this Court does not find any lack of application of mind by the District Selection Committee while considering the application of the petitioner. The Committee, in fact, took notice of the fact that no time limit has been prescribed and decided to apply the principle laid down in the provision of clause 2.5 of the P.D.S. Control Order,2001. It is true that no such provision can be strictly or literally applied to a case where no provision fixing a date for receiving the application is made in the Government Circular. However, it is also true that where no such time limit is prescribed, then such an application must be filed within a reasonable period. What is a reasonable period would depend upon the facts and circumstances of the case in - 4 - question. It is evident that the whole reason for making provision for grant of licence to the dependent of the deceased Thela Vendor is to enable the family of the deceased to meet the immediate financial crisis that may have come upon the family on account of sudden death of its bread-earner. In that view of the matter any such application for getting the licence on compassionate ground must be filed within a reasonably short period of time. In the present matter not only the Government Circular has been issued more than five years after the death of the father of the petitioner, but the petitioner himself approached the authorities for licence on compassionate ground by filing his application more than 10 years after the Government Circular had come into existence and more than 15 years after the death of his father. In the said circumstances, it cannot be said that the petitioner has applied within a reasonable period of time in order to be entitled to the issuance of any such licence for Thela Vendor in his favour. The rejection order by the respondent authorities is, therefore, not fit to - 5 - be interfered with. The writ application is, accordingly, dismissed. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J. )