IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1467 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13476 of 2011 ====================================================== Md. Asiruddin S/o Md. Tamijuddin R/o Village- Chutia, P.S.- Shambhuganj, District- Banka .... .... Appellants Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Old Secretariat, Patna 2. The Deputy Development Commissioner, District- Banka 3. The District Magistrate, Banka 4. The Block Development Officer, Block - Banka, District- Banka 5. The Block Development Officer, Block- Amarpur, District - Banka 6. The Block Development Officer, Block- Belhar, District- Banka 7. The Block Development Officer, Block- Fullidumar, District- Banka 8. The Block Development Officer, Block- Rajaun, District- Banka 9. The Block Development Officer, Block- Katoria, District- Banka 10. The Block Development Officer, Block- Chandan, District- Banka 11. The Block Development Officer, Block- Shambhuganj, District- Banka 12. The Executive Engineer, Rural Development Department Circle-2, Banka 13. The Executive Engineer, Rural Development Department Circle 1, Baunsi, Banka 14. The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Works Division, Banka 15. The Junior Engineer, Rural Development Department Circle 2, Banka .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Ms. Sushmita Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Nirbhay K. Singh, G.P.-26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER Patna High Court LPA No.1467 of 2011 (3) dt.19-10-2011 2 / 3 2 (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3. 19-10-2011 This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is preferred by the writ petitioner against the common order dated 23rd August 2011 insofar as the above C.W.J.C. No. 13476 of 2011 has been disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to deposit 15% of the value of the undistributed rice @ Rs.10/- per kilogram or the rice itself in the present form, if already not deposited. The appellant is a licensee of a fair price shop. It appears that under the scheme of ‘Sampoorna Gramin Rojgar Yojna’ framed by the Central Government the dealers under public distribution system were allotted certain quantity of rice to be distributed amongst the beneficiaries under the scheme during the years 2002 to 2006. It appears that the said rice was not distributed to the beneficiaries. Consequently, pursuant to the audit report the State Government has called upon the appellant and such other licensees to pay price of the undistributed rice @ Rs.13.10 per kilogram. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed above C.W.J.C. No. 13476 of 2011 under Article 226 of the Constitution. The learned single Judge has, pursuant to the order made in C.W.J.C. No. 711 of 2011 issued direction that the impugned communication be treated as a show-cause notice and that the authority below will make the final order after receiving reply from the writ petitioner. Further the learned single Judge has issued the direction to deposit 15% of the value of the undistributed rice @ Rs.10/-per kilogram as recorded hereinabove. It is the aforesaid direction to deposit 15% of the value of the undistributed rice, which is the subject matter of challenge before us. Learned advocate Ms. Sushmita Mishra has appeared for the appellant. She has submitted that the appellant has been Patna High Court LPA No.1467 of 2011 (3) dt.19-10-2011 3 / 3 3 meted discriminatory treatment by issuing direction to deposit 15% of the value of the undistributed rice. She has submitted that in the above referred C.W.J.C. No. 711 of 2011 no such direction was issued. She has further submitted that judicial discipline requires that identical relief is granted; the condition imposed upon the appellant, therefore, is unwarranted. She has also submitted that the impugned direction amounts to adjudication of issue against the appellant. Ms. Mishra states that the appellant has already submitted reply to the show cause notice. We see no merit in either of the contentions raised by Ms. Mishra. The learned single Judge has the discretion to impose a suitable condition. On the facts of the case the conditions imposed by the learned single Judge does not appear to us to be unreasonable so as to warrant interference. For the aforesaid reasons, we dismiss the Appeal. Without prejudice to the rights and contentions raised in the writ petition, the appellant will deposit the aforesaid sum equivalent to 15% of the value of the undistributed rice @ Rs. 10/- per kilogram as directed by the learned single Judge within six weeks from today. The issue will be decided by the Deputy Development Commissioner/competent authority within two months from the date the appellant makes the deposit as directed hereinabove. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)