Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.C.BEHERA
Padmaja Manjari Swain – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' registration for paddy selling. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. opposite parties' objections to application. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. welfare objective of paddy procurement system. (Para 5) |
| 4. justification for granting petitioners' request. (Para 6) |
| 5. final order directing permission for paddy selling. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
Judgment :
This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioners praying for directing the Opposite Parties to register the names of the petitioners as farmers for selling their yield paddy of the year 2025-26. Because, their names have not been registered in PPS Portal, as farmers for selling their paddy only due to the avoidance of the Opposite Parties for non-registration of their names.
To which, the learned Standing counsel for the State objected contending that, the petitioners had not submitted their applications before the Primary Paddy Procurement Society before 25.08.2025, but, they(petitioners) had approached the Secretary of the society after 25.08.2025, for which, their applications have not been registered. So, there is no illegality in registering the names of the petitioners in PPS Portal.
The court upheld that the rigid enforcement of registration protocols should not impede farmers' access to sell their produce, affirming the system's purpose to support farmer livelihoods.
Judicial intervention is warranted when technicalities inhibit farmers' access to government procurement systems, emphasizing the welfare objective of agricultural policies.
The court emphasized the need for transparency and consistency in the registration process for procurement, ensuring that decisions are communicated within a reasonable timeframe.
Exclusion of a party from a procurement process without a hearing violates principles of natural justice and renders the action illegal.
Exclusion from administrative decisions must comply with natural justice, ensuring the affected party is given a fair chance to respond before adverse actions are taken.
The exclusion of a party from procurement proceedings without a fair opportunity to be heard violates principles of natural justice, and any prior rights must be respected.
The exclusion of a party from a procurement list without a hearing violates principles of natural justice, necessitating reconsideration of such decisions.
Administrative decisions affecting rights must observe principles of natural justice, including providing an opportunity to be heard.
Authority must comply with the principles of natural justice by providing an opportunity to be heard before making adverse decisions affecting rights previously established.
Exclusion from government procurement processes without providing a fair hearing violates principles of natural justice, necessitating reconsideration of such administrative decisions.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
