IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10729 of 2009 ***** Najmi Khatoon, wife of Managing Director. Meraj Alam, resident of village- Mangal tola, Harewa, Post Office, Harewa, Police Station Salkhua, District-Saharsa. …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The District Magistrate, Saharsa. 3. The Additional Collector, Saharsa. 4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Saharsa. 5. The Sub Divisional officer, Simri Bakhtiarpur. 6. The District Welfare Officer, Saharsa. 7. The District Supply Officer, Saharsa. 8. The Block Supply Officer, Salkhua Block, District-Saharsa. …. …. Respondents ----------- 2. 26.8.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner is challenging the decision of the District Selection Committee dated 23.5.2009 by virtue of which they have rejected the claim of the present petitioner for grant of a license of a P.D.S. dealership under compassionate category. Claim by the petitioner was made that her father-in-law had a P.D.S. license and after his demise in terms of the provisions she is entitled to such a grant being daughter-in- law of the family. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that if there is a provision of grant of license to a daughter-in-law under the compassionate category then it ought to have been granted. Merely because the husband of the petitioner is a Shiksha Mitra, therefore, she cannot be denied the benefit or selection in compassionate category. The reasoning assigned in the decision of the committee - 2 - states that it is not a case of an indigent family or the petitioner has not been left in distress to fend for herself. As already recorded earlier, the husband of the petitioner is gainfully employed and there are other family members also in government employment. It is not a case that the petitioner is indigent and has nobody to take care of her and therefore she should be given P.D.S license on compassionate ground. The reasoning assigned is not irrational or arbitrary. The writ application has no merit. It is dismissed. Pawan/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)