In absence of demand before competent authority, writ of mandamus not maintainable or is pre-mature:Patna High Court

In Ali Ashraf Siddiqui vs. The State of Bihar (2025), Patna High Court's division bench of Justices P. B. Bajanthri and Sunil Dutta Mishra heard the petitioner who had sought direction for the respondent authorities to release the vehicle, Scorpio because he is an actual/ bonafide owner of the vehicle. He prayed the Court to direct the respondents authorities to hand over the vehicle of the petitioner after furnishing suitable, sureties as per direction of the Court.

The Court noted that "there is no demand before the competent authority in particularly under Rule of 12A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 read with amended Sub-Rule 2 of Rule 12A in the year 2022 and 2023. In the absence of demand before the competent authority, the present Writ petition for writ of mandamus is not maintainable or it is pre-mature. Accordingly, the present Writ petition stands disposed of as pre-mature." 

The Court observed: "Disposal of the present petition would not be a hurdle for the petitioner to invoke remedy under Rule 12A of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 including amended provisions in the year 2022 and 2023. If such application is submitted in the prescribed form before the competent authority, the competent authority shall pass speaking order within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such application. If the confiscation of the vehicle has attained finality, in that event, petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal before the appropriate authority."

Besides the State of Bihar, the six other respondents were: District Magistrate, Siwan, Superintendent of Police, Siwan, S.H.O. of Excise, Siwan, District Magistrate, Patna, Superintendent of Police, Patna, S.H.O. of Phulwari Sharif Police Station, Patna.  Justice Bajanthri authored the judgement.