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) 635

ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
Maa Tarini SHG, Bonth, represented through its Secretary, Annapurna Malik – Petitioner
Versus
State of Odisha & Others - Opposite Parties
WP(C) No.2068 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.

Exclusion from administrative benefits without a hearing violates principles of natural justice and is deemed arbitrary, especially when rights have been established.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 226 and 227 - Writ petition for quashing Office Order excluding the petitioner-WSHG from the paddy procurement agency for Kharif Marketing Season 2025-26 - Action challenged as arbitrary and illegal. (Paras 1-2)

(B) Natural Justice - Requirement for issuance of show-cause notice and opportunity to be heard before exclusion from procurement - Procedural fairness in administrative actions emphasized. (Paras 6-7)

(C) Rights of Petitioner - The petitioner-WSHG had created rights as a selected procurement agency with training completed and equipment received - Exclusion without a hearing deemed unlawful. (Paras 4-5)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner-WSHG was selected as a paddy procurement agency for KMS 2025-26 but was excluded without due procedure on grounds of proximity to other procurement centers and lack of separate purchase center.

Findings of Court:
The impugned Order excluding the name of the petitioner-WSHG was quashed, and the Collector was directed to reconsider the exclusion after providing a fair hearing.

Issues: The main questions involved the discretion of the authorities to exclude the petitioner without a hearing and the validity of grounds cited for exclusion.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the action of exclusion was arbitrary, emphasizing the need for adherence to principles of natural justice and that the petitioner had established rights as a paddy procurement agency.

Result: Writ petition allowed, and the impugned Order quashed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's claim for procurement rights. (Para 1 , 2)
2. grounds for petitioner's exclusion. (Para 4 , 5)
3. procedural fairness required before exclusion. (Para 6 , 7)
4. merit in petitioner's arguments. (Para 8)
5. final orders and directions to reconsider exclusion. (Para 9 , 10 , 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 petitioner- Maa Tarini-WSHG praying for quashing the Office Order dated 03.01.2026 under Annexure-8 issued by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4) relating to the exclusion of the name of the petitioner-WSHG from the Annexure-7 as a society/agency for the procurement of paddy of Kharif Marketing Season 2025-26 of Bonth 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 Bonth 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 Bonth Block 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 Bonth Block reflecting the name of the petitioner-WSHG as such, in Serial No.85 of Annexure-3 indicating its PAC Code No.S2040422. Thereafter, as per Office Order dated 11.12.2025 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. 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 of Bonth Block. 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 of Bonth Block was prepared on dated 02.01.2026 as per Annexure-7, in which, the name of the petitioner-WSHG was in Sl. No.33, 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- 8 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 of 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 of Bonth Block.

For which, without, getting any way, the petitioner-WSHG filed this writ petition against the Opp. Parties praying for quashing the impugned Letter/Order dated 03.01.2026 vide Annexure-8 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 of Bonth 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 Bonth Block in accordance with the notified policy.

3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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