SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Ori) 36

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.
Trinath Shakti Group (SHG) – Appellant 
Versus
State of Odisha and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 30243 of 2025
Decided On : 16-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Sameer Kumar Mishra, P.S. Mohanty, J. Pradhan, S.P. Parida, S. Sahoo
For the Respondents: B. Routray, P.K Rath, S. Rath, A. Behera, S.K. Behera, S. Das, G. Lenka, A. Mohanty, S. Chandan, I.P. Bose, S. Mohapatra, A. Biswal, S.N. Pattnaik

Engagement of Self Help Groups for supply of Take Home Ration is governed by administrative guidelines, and lack of renewal does not constitute an enforceable right, nor does it require a prior notice based on principles of natural justice.

Headnote:(A) Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 - Engagement of Self Help Groups - Disengagement of petitioner SHG from supply of Take Home Ration under the ICDS Scheme confirmed - No show cause notice or hearing provided before rescission of agreement - Principles of natural justice violated. (Paras 2, 9, 16, 21)

(B) Contractual Nature of Engagement - Engagement governed by guidelines - Petitioner does not have vested right for renewal post-termination - Non-renewal does not attract prior notice. (Paras 16, 18, 24)

(C) Administrative Decision - Judicial review limited - Court cannot reappreciate evidence unless the decision is perverse or illegal. (Paras 21, 24)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a registered Self Help Group, was engaged for preparing and supplying THR Chhatua since 2011, but was disengaged without prior notice based on an enquiry report highlighting deficiencies.

Findings of Court:
Disengagement upheld, affirming no procedural impropriety; emphasis on adherence to administrative guidelines.

Issues: Whether the petitioner was denied natural justice and had a right to continue supplying THR.

Ratio Decidendi: Court emphasized that principles of natural justice require opportunity to be heard but do not guarantee effective representation; disengagement was aligned with contractual guidelines.

Result: Writ Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. writ application filed challenging order. (Para 1 , 2)
2. appellate authority confirmed disengagement of petitioner. (Para 3)
3. opposite parties oppose petitioner’s claims. (Para 4 , 5)
4. petitioner's arguments focus on procedural violations. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
5. opposite parties argue no enforceable right exists. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
6. court confirms legal and procedural compliance. (Para 15 , 16 , 17)
7. court emphasizes the need for proper authorization. (Para 18 , 19)
8. limited representation accepted; procedural integrity maintained. (Para 20 , 21)
9. court finds no grounds for interference. (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
10. writ petition dismissed. (Para 25)

JUDGMENT :

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

1. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner, Trinath Shakti Group (SHG), assailing the order dated 14.10.2025 passed by the Director, ICDS & Social Welfare, Women and Child Development Department, Government of Odisha, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected and the order of the Collector, Bhadrak dated 20.09.2019, disengaging the petitioner from the preparation and supply of Take Home Ration (THR/Chhatua) under the Chandbali-II ICDS Project, was confirmed.

Case of the Petitioner

2. The petitioner is a registered Self Help Group situated at Orasahi under Chandbali Block in the district of Bhadrak. It holds a valid food licence issued under the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 for manufacture and supply of Take Home Ration (THR) Chhatua. Pursuant to agreements executed with the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Chandbali-II ICDS Project, the petitioner had been engaged for preparation and supply of THR (Chhatua) under the Supplementary Nutrition Programme (SNP) since the year 2011. The agreements were renewed from time to time in accordance with the applicable guidelines. During the period from 2011 till October, 2019, the petitioner’s unit was subjected to periodical inspections by various inspecting teams. The inspection reports placed on record indicate that the quality of THR supplied by the petitioner and its performance under the ICDS Project were found satisfactory. No adverse communication relating to quality, hygiene or delay in supply was issued to the petitioner during the said period. On 10.09.2019, a District Level Enquiry Team headed by the Tahasildar, Chandbali conducted an enquiry into the functioning of the petitioner SHG and submitted a report. The report recorded certain observations relating to non-installation of a roasting machine, cash transactions and maintenance of cash book and pass book.

On the basis of the aforesaid enquiry report dated 10.09.2019, the Collector, Bhadrak issued letter No.1971 dated 20.09.2019 directing rescission of the agreement with the petitioner and initiation of the process for selection of a new SHG under the Chandbali-II ICDS Project. Before issuance of the said letter, no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and no opportunity of explanation or hearing was afforded. Aggrieved by the enquiry report dated 10.09.2019 and the consequential order dated 20.09.2019 passed by the Collector, Bhadrak, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.19269 of 2019. By judgment dated 06.05.2025, this Court disposed of the writ petition directing the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the Director, ICDS & Social Welfare, Odisha. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Director, ICDS & Social Welfare. Notice of hearing was issued fixing the appeal for hearing on 26.08.2025 at the Conference Hall of the Women and Child Development Department. On the day of hearing, the Secretary of the petitioner SHG was unable to attend the hearing due to illness and authorised the Cashier of the SHG to appear on her behalf. The authorised representative appeared in the Secretariat on the scheduled date along with her Advocate and her husband.

It is stated in the additional affid

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top