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) 571

ORISSA HIGH COURT CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J. 
Omm Baba Sanideb WSHG represented, through its Secretary, Sabita Behera, District-Bhadrak -Petitioner.
Versus
State of Odisha & Others - Opposite Parties.
WP(C) No.751 of 2026
Decided On : 30-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.K. Dalei, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. G. Mohanty, Standing Counsel., Mr. S.K. Baral, Adv.

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.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 226 and 227 - Writ petition for quashing exclusion from paddy procurement list - The petitioner, a registered Women Self Help Group (WSHG), was excluded from the procurement list without a fair hearing, violating principles of natural justice. (Paras 1, 4, 10, 12)

(B) Natural Justice - The requirement for adequate opportunity and consideration of a party’s response before an adverse decision is made is fundamental. Mere issuance of a show-cause notice without proper hearing is insufficient to satisfy due process. (Paras 8, 10)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was initially included as a paddy procurement agency but was abruptly excluded by the Collector without a hearing. The organization had prepared adequately for procurement, having completed training and received equipment.

Findings of Court:
The exclusion order was quashed due to violation of natural justice, with directions for the matter to be reconsidered with appropriate hearings.

Issues: The main issues pertained to the legality of the exclusion and the requirement for the authorities to comply with natural justice provisions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that exclusion from the procurement list without a hearing is not legally sustainable, reaffirming the rights created in favor of the petitioner and the necessity of following due process.

Result: Writ petition allowed; exclusion quashed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner was wrongfully excluded from procurement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. failure to provide a hearing violates natural justice. (Para 7 , 8)
3. court emphasizes the importance of compliance with natural justice. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. writ petition allowed; previous order quashed. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner- Omm Baba Sanideb WSHG praying for quashing the Office Order dated 03.01.2026 under Annexure-9 issued by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4) relating to the exclusion of the name of the petitioner-WSHG from the Annexure-8 as a society/agency for the procurement of paddy of Kharif Marketing Season 2025-26 and to declare the action of the Opp. Parties relating to the exclusion of the name of the petitioner for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 as arbitrary and illegal and issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Opp. Parties to allow the petitioner-WSHG to procure Paddy for KMS 2025-2026 in accordance with the notified policy along with other reliefs, to which, the petitioner-WSHG is entitled for.

2. The case of the petitioner-WSHG is that, as per the decision of the District Level Paddy Procurement Committee (DLPC) for KMS 2025-26, the petitioner-WSHG was selected as a paddy procurement society/agency of Basudevpur Block reflecting the name of the petitioner-WSHG as such, in Serial No.28 OF Annexure-4 indicating its PAC Code No.S2040801. Thereafter, as per Office Order dated 11.12.2025 and 18.12.2025 issued by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4), a training programme was conducted and in such training programme, the members of the petitioner-WSHG successfully completed their training and demonstrated their preparedness to procure paddy in compliances with the policy frameworks as per Annexure-5 series. Thereafter, on dated 15.12.2025, the authorities distributed paddy procurement equipments to all the selected WSHGs including the petitioner-WSHG, to which, the petitioner-WSHG received with proper acknowledgments.

The above conduct of the Opp. Parties is clearly clarifying that, petitioner-WSHG was fully equipped in its all respect for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26. Nodal Officer was also duly appointed for the smooth progress of the paddy procurement system by the petitioner-WSHG and the final list of eligible Women Self Help Groups including the petitioner- WSHG for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 was prepared on dated 02.01.2026 as per Annexure-8, in which, the name of the petitioner-WSHG was in Sl. No.3, but on its next day, i.e. on 03.01.2026, suddenly, the same Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4) unilaterally and illegally issued the impugned Office Order vide Annexure-9 excluding the name of the petitioner-WSHG as an agency for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 behind the back of the petitioner without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner-WSHG for the exclusion its name from the paddy procurement system for KMS 2025-26 and illegally tagged to the registered farmers of the petitioner with Opp. Party No.6-WSHG for the paddy procurement for KMS 2025-26.

For which, without, getting any way, the petitioner filed this writ petition against the Opp. Parties praying for quashing the impugned Letter/Order dated 03.01.2026 vide Annexure-9 issued/passed by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4) relating to the exclusion of the name of the petitioner-WSHG as an agency for the procurement of paddy for Kharif Marketing Season 2025-26 and to declare the action of the Opp. Parties as arbitrary and illegal and to issue a Writ of Mandamus against the Opp. Parties directing the Opp. Parties to allow the petitioner-WSHG to procure the paddy for KMS 2025-2026 in accordance with the notified policy.

3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and

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