IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14282 of 2011 Mahendra Rajak, S/O Munarik Rajak, R/O Vill.- Chiksi, P.S.- Sigouri, Distt.- Patna. . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Deputy Development Commissioner-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Patna 3. The Block Development Officer, Palignaj, Patna. Respondents. ---------------------------------- 2/ 08.09.2011 The petitioner, who is the licensee under Paliganj Block in the district of Patna. The petitioner prays for quashing the order vide memo no. 762 dated 29.07.2011 whereby he has been directed to refund the value of rice of 365.43 quintals of rice at APL rate of Rs.13.70 per Kg which remained with the petitioner under 50 % and 30 % of Sampurna Gramin Rojgar Yojana. The petitioner disputes the quantity of rice allotted to him. According to him, he lifted only 102.30 quintals of rice and not 762.14 quintals of rice. The petitioner submits that he distributed 94.50 quintals of rice and only 8 quintals of rice remained with him. Earlier similar matters had come up before this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 711 of 2011 (Awadh Prasad Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) & C.W.J.C. No. 757 of 2011 (Suresh Prasad @ Raj Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.). The aforesaid writ applications have been disposed of by order dated 06.07.2011 after noticing the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. As the facts and issues are common, the order dated 06.07.2011 passed in 2 C.W.J.C. No. 711 of 2011 and C.W.J.C. No. 757 of 2011 would also govern the instant writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 06.07.2011 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 711 of 2011 and C.W.J.C. No. 757 of 2011 including interim protection as mentioned therein, with the condition that the petitioner would either deposit 50% of the value of 8 quintals of undistributed rice at Rs.10 per Kg. or the rice itself, if already not deposited within two months. The petitioner would file a detailed representation regarding his claim before the Deputy Development Commissioner, Patna within four weeks from today, who would dispose of the representation within two months. This order would not come in the way of petitioner, if he wants to deposit the value of rice or rice itself in excess of 50%. The Court has not formed any opinion of its own regarding quantity of rice that was lifted by the petitioner. It would be for the authorities to ascertain the aforesaid matter. No coercive steps would be taken subject to the aforesaid direction. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)