IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4032 of 2010 Rajesh Kumar S/O Sri Kamleshwar Paswan R/O Vill.- Panchdamian, P.S. Lalganj, Distt.- Vaishali At Hajipur Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Its Chief Secretary Govt. Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 2. The Sub Divisional Officer Hajipur, Distt.- Vaishali 3. Chairman, District Level Selection (P.D.S.) Committee Cum District Magistrate Vaishali At Hajipur 4. The Secretary District Level Selection (P.D.S.) Committee Cum District Supply Officer, Vaishali At Hajipur 5. The Block Supply Officer Lalganj, Distt.- Vaishali ------------------------ 09/ 22.09.2011 Heard Mr. Aditya Narayan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Anant Kumar, Assisting counsel to A.A.G. 2 for the State. The petitioner had questioned the selection of Dealers under the Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001, inter alia, on grounds that the proportionate distribution of quota as envisaged under the Order which was notified vide G.S.R. No. 1 dated 20.2.2007 as found at paragraph 2.1 of the Order reserving a minimum of 16 per cent of the dealership in favour of the Scheduled Caste candidates was not followed. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his contention, has referred to the selection list as placed at Annexure-4 to the writ petition and has submitted that a bare perusal thereof made it apparent that the distribution of dealership was not in accordance with paragraph 2.1. Another grievance which was 2 raised by the petitioner as mentioned in paragraph 14 of the writ petition was that his application though having been taken note of in paragraph 10 of the writ petition, he has not been communicated as to whether at all his application was considered. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent State and in which it has been demonstrated that as the number of dealership against the Scheduled Caste quota had already exceeded the proportion fixed in the sub-division i.e. as against 99 dealership against Scheduled Caste quota, there were already 121 dealers in the said category and hence the representation of the candidates belonging to S.C. category had exceeded their quota. It is in these circumstances that no candidate from the S.C. category was appointed. It is, however, admitted that the application of the petitioner though received but was not considered. Be that as it may. Had there been any appointment from the Scheduled Caste category the non consideration of the application of the petitioner may have acted prejudicial to his interest but as the position is that by reason of excess appointments existing in the said category, no appointment was made from the present panel, the grievance of non consideration of his application, becomes immaterial. That being the position, nothing survives in the writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)