NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(C) No. 719 of 2021

1. Suchinta Gupta, W/o Ganesh Gupta, aged about 48 years, President –

Pooja Mahila Swa-Sahayata Samuh, Villatge Lawa, Block Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.)

2. Smt. Rajmuni Singh wife of Basnath Singh, aged about 45 years, Secretary – Pooja Mahila Swa-Sahayata Samuh, Village Lawa, Block Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.)

---- Petitioners Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, Post Office Rakhi, District Raipur (C.G.)

2. The Collector Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.)

3. Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-

Ramanujganj (C.G.)

4. Food Inspector Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.)

5. Proprietor Government Fair Price Shop, Gamhariya, Village Panchayat, Gamhariya, Block Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramnujganj (C.G.)

---- Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. V.K. Pandey, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 4/State : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

09.02.2024

1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

“10.1 issue notices to the respondents, returnable within early date of hearing.

10.2 set aside the impugned order vide ANNEXURE P/1 dated

06.01.2021 passed by the respondent No.2.

10.3 direct the respondents to allow the petitioners to run the fair price shop alloted to them.

10.4 grant any other relief(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in favour of petitioners, which deemed fit & proper in the facts &

circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.

10.5 Cost of the petition.”

2. The facts of the present case are that a Fair Price Shop was allotted to the petitioners on 29.07.2015 by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Ramanujganj/respondent No.3. Certain complaints were made against the functioning of the Fair Price Shop, therefore, an inquiry was conducted by the Food Inspector and the report was submitted on 10.04.2020 where it was found that the petitioners did not provide food grains to few persons and the details were not notified online. On 17.04.2020, respondent No. 3 issued notice. The petitioners filed a detailed reply to the show cause notice on 23.04.2020 and thereafter respondent No. 3 suspended the Fair Price Shop allotted to the petitioners on 30.04.2020. The petitioners preferred an appeal against the order dated 30.04.2020, but in between another order (Annexure P/7) was passed by respondent No.3 dated 21.05.2020 whereby the allotment of Fair Price Shop to the petitioners was cancelled. The petitioners preferred an appeal before the Collector according to Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2016, but the same was dismissed vide order dated 07.01.2021.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that notice was issued before placing the Fair Price Shop of the petitioners under suspension dated 30.04.2020, but before cancellation of the allotment of Fair Price Shop, no opportunity of hearing was afforded and no notice was issued to the petitioners, therefore, the order is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Clause 16(3) of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, thus, he would pray to quash the orders dated 07.01.2021 and 21.05.2020 passed by the Collector and the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Ramanujganj, respectively.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose. He would submit that notice was issued to the petitioners on 17.04.2020 and the reply was filed on 23.04.2020 by the petitioners. He would also submit that sufficient opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners before taking the decision and there is no scope of interference.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. It is apparent that the order of suspension was passed by respondent No. 3 on 3