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) 579

ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK 
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
Maa Subhadra Self Help Group, Bahabalpur & Others – Petitioner
Versus
State of Odisha & Others - Opposite Parties
WP(C) No.2470 of 2026
Decided On :  30-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Sadasiva Patra (1), Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. G. Mohanty, Standing Counsel

Administrative decisions affecting rights must observe principles of natural justice, including providing an opportunity to be heard.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Writ petition for quashing the exclusion of a Self Help Group from the list of agencies for paddy procurement - Petitioner selected after training and equipment distribution, yet excluded without a hearing - Prior rights created necessitate an opportunity of being heard before exclusion. (Paras 1, 6, 10)

(B) Natural Justice - Requirement of providing an opportunity to be heard before taking adverse actions - The court emphasized the necessity of adherence to the principles of natural justice in administrative decisions affecting rights. (Paras 6 and 10)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner-SHG was selected as a paddy procurement agency for KMS 2025-26, trained, and supplied with equipment, but was later excluded without notice or opportunity to respond, along with reallocation of its associated farmers.

Findings of Court:
The exclusion of the petitioner-SHG was arbitrary and illegal as it violated principles of natural justice without providing any hearing or cause. The order was quashed, and the case was directed for reconsideration with a hearing.

Issues: The main issues included the legality of the exclusion of the petitioner without a hearing and the administrative decision-making process.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that an established right to be heard before exclusion was violated, justifying the quashing of the impugned order; reiterating the importance of natural justice in administrative actions.

Result: Writ petition allowed and impugned order quashed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's rights and selection for procurement (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5)
2. need for opportunity to be heard before exclusion (Para 6)
3. justification for interference with opp. party's decision (Para 7)
4. merit in the writ petition and its allowance (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
5. final order and procedural directions for reconsideration (Para 11 , 12)

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 petitioners praying for quashing the Office Order dated 13.01.2026 under Annexure-7 issued by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.3) relating to the exclusion of the name of the petitioner- SHG from the Annexure-6 as a society/agency for the procurement of paddy of Kharif Marketing Season 2025-26 of Tihidi Block 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 of Tihidi Block 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 of Tihidi Block in accordance with the notified policy along with other reliefs, to which, the petitioner-SHG is entitled for.

2. The case of the petitioner-SHG 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 Tihidi Block reflecting the name of the petitioner-SHG as such, in Serial No.15 of Annexure-3 indicating its PPC Code No.S2040709. Thereafter, as per Office Order dated 18.12.2025 issued by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.3), a training programme was conducted and in such training programme, the members of the petitioner-SHG successfully completed their training and demonstrated their preparedness to procure paddy in compliances with the policy frameworks. Thereafter, on dated 15.12.2025, the authorities distributed paddy procurement equipments to all the selected WSHGs including the petitioner-SHG, to which, the petitioner-SHG received with proper acknowledgments.

The above conduct of the Opp. Parties is clearly clarifying that, petitioner-SHG was fully equipped in its all respect for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 of Tihidi Block. Nodal Officer was also duly appointed for the smooth progress of the paddy procurement system by the petitioner-SHG and the final list of eligible Self Help Groups including the petitioner-SHG for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 of Tihidi Block was prepared on dated 01.01.2026 as per Annexure-6, but on, i.e. on 13.01.2026, suddenly, the same Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.3) unilaterally and illegally issued the impugned Office Order vide Annexure-7 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-SHG for the exclusion of its name from the paddy procurement system for KMS 2025-26 and illegally tagged to the registered farmers of the petitioner with Bamanbindha PACS for the paddy procurement for KMS 2025-26 of Tihidi Block.

For which, without, getting any way, the petitioner-SHG filed this writ petition against the Opp. Parties praying for quashing the impugned Letter/Order dated 13.01.2026 vide Annexure-7 issued/passed by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.3) relating to the exclusion of the name of the petitioner-SHG as an agency for the procurement of paddy for Kharif Marketing Season 2025-26 of Tihidi Block 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 of Tihidi Block in accordance with the notified policy.

3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner & the learned Standing Counsel for the Sta

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