Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.C.BEHERA
Surendra Kumar Mishra – Appellant
Versus
Principal Secretary, Food Supplies & Consumer Welfare Deptt. Govt. of Odisha, Bhubaneswar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. paddy procurement system aims to support farmers. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. opposite parties contest lack of proof. (Para 2) |
| 3. court finds no justification to deny the petitioner. (Para 6) |
| 4. writ petition is allowed; directions issued to opposite parties. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for directing the Opposite Parties to register his name as farmer for selling his yield paddy of the year 2025-26. Because, his name has not been registered in PPS Portal as farmer for selling his paddy only due to the avoidance of the Opposite Parties for non-registration of his name.
3. It is the case as well as the submission of the petitioner that, he (petitioner) had submitted his application on dated 14.08.2025 for registration of his name as farmer, which was much prior to the fixed date i.e. much prior to 30.08.2025. But, sill then, the Opposite Parties did not register his name in the PPS Portal as farmer. For which, he (petitioner) is not able to sell his yield paddy of this year to the Government.
4. The petitioner is none else, but he is a farmer. He (petit
Judicial intervention is warranted when technicalities inhibit farmers' access to government procurement systems, emphasizing the welfare objective of agricultural policies.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
