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

2020 Supreme(Ori) 221

ORISSA HIGH COURT: CUTTACK
B.R.SARANGI, J.
Sidheswar Mahila Mandal and another – Petitioners
Versus
State of Odisha and others - Opp. Parties
W.P.(C) No. 14197 Of 2019
Decided On : 28-01-2020

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:M/s. S. Mohapatra and P. Mangaraj, Advocates.
For the Opp. Parties :Ms. S. Pattnaik, Addl. Government Advocate

Administrative actions affecting rights must adhere to natural justice principles, ensuring affected parties are given a fair opportunity to be heard before decisions are made.

Headnote:(A) Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 - Section 3.1(zz) - Principles of Natural Justice - Disengagement of Self Help Group (SHG) and blacklisting for five years due to alleged unsafe food supply - Action taken without providing an opportunity of hearing to the SHG found to be in violation of natural justice principles. (Paras 17)

(B) Natural Justice - Fairness and opportunities for the affected parties before adverse decisions are foundational to justifiable actions in administrative scenarios, reinforcing the requirement of audi alteram partem in administrative proceedings. (Paras 8, 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner SHG was engaged in preparing and supplying Chhatua under an agreement. Despite satisfactory performance, it was blacklisted following reports of unsafe product without the opportunity for a hearing. (Paras 2.1, 3)

Findings of Court:
The court held the action against the petitioner violated natural justice principles, specifically the lack of opportunity to contest the adverse report, and thus quashed the decision, remitting the matter for reconsideration. (Paras 17)

Issues: Whether the action taken against the SHG without a hearing was legally sustainable, considering the principles of natural justice. (Paras 6)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that natural justice is fundamental in administrative actions affecting rights, asserting that a fair opportunity must be provided to parties affected before adverse actions are taken. (Paras 11, 15)

Result: Writ petition allowed; order quashed and remitted for reconsideration with an opportunity for hearing.

Table of Content
1. withdrawal of contract due to alleged safety violations. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments on the validity of actions taken against shg. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's procedural overview and consideration of parties' arguments. (Para 5 , 6)
4. importance of natural justice in administrative actions. (Para 7 , 8)
5. history and principles surrounding natural justice. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
6. court quashes earlier order for lack of fairness. (Para 17)
7. conclusion: writ petition disposed without costs. (Para 18)

JUDGMENT :

B.R. SARANGI, J.

1. The petitioners, by way of this writ petition, seek to quash order dated 31.07.2019 in Annexure-5 disengaging petitioner no.1-Self Help Group (SHG) and blacklisting it for a period of five years by forfeiting the security deposits, on the ground that the same was in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.

2. The factual matrix of the case, in hand, is that the opposite party no.1 issued guidelines for the decentralized implementation of Take Home Ration (THR), which is a supplementary nutrition programme of ICDS, vide Annexure-2. As per the said guidelines, the THR is to be given to pregnant and lactating mothers, children from 6 months to 3 years, as they do not attend the AWC (Anganwadi Centre) on a daily basis. The severely malnourished children of 3 to 6 years are to be given THR over and above Hot Cooked Meal. The Government of India has fixed the per beneficiary cost, calorie and protein norm to be maintained across the States. The Government of Odisha has taken an in-principle decision to give Ready to Eat (RTE) i.e wheat-based Chhatua in the form of THR to all eligible beneficiaries as it will ensure that it goes to the intended beneficiary and not entered the family kitty. The guidelines shall be applicable universally throughout the State. While implementing the guidelines, various aspects should be taken into consideration as mentioned therein. For implementation of the procedure, the Government of India supplies wheat at a subsidized rate, hence wheat based Chhatua will be prepared by SHG(s) and the ration entitlement and packaging thereof has also been indicated along with financial guidelines for decentralized procurement for THR. In Clause-5 the quality parameters have been provided. In Clause-6, it has been stipulated that a contract should be signed between the CDPO and the SHG(s) laying down the terms and conditions of preparation and supply. Normally, the contract should be for a period of one year only. Before the end of one year, a review of the SHG(s) performance should be made by the Collector after which a decision can be taken to either renew or rescind the contract. A security deposit of 1% of the total value of production per month should be taken from the SHG(s) and kept with the CDPO and returned on termination of the contract. This should, however, be seized in case of action as mentioned therein against the SHG(s).

2.1 The petitioner no.1 SHG was engaged in preparing Chhatua/Ladoo as per the indent submitted by the CDPO, Balipatana for every month. It was supplying Chhatua/Ladoo for the beneficiaries by entering into agreement as per Annexure-3 for a period of one year from 01.07.2018 to 30.06.2019. The said period of contract was extended up to 31st March, 2020, vide office order dated 25.07.2019 communicated by the Director, ICDS & SW to all the Collectors, and copy thereof was communicated to the petitioner no.1 on 29.07.2019 in Annexure-A/4. Therein, opposite party no.2 was directed to adhere to the guidelines issued by the Government. Performance of petitioner no.1-SHG was assessed by the competent authority on 23.10.2018 and analysis report of chhatua sample indicates that the sample of chhatua was falling under Regulation No. 2.12.1 of FSS (PF & FA) Regulations, 2011 and found satisfactory based on the tests performed. Similarly, the analysis report of food sample held on 27.08.2019 indicates that the sample Chhatua was fa

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