Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Mantram Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Home
Chhattisgarh HC
2024
Mantram Nishad Vs State of ChhattisgarhMantram Nishad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Dismissed¶30

Mantram Nishad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC19 Jun 2024WPC/1054/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WPC No. 1054 of 2024, High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, single bench (Parth Prateem Sahu), decided 20/06/2024. Petitioners Mantram Nishad, Bhupendra Singh, Ganesh Nishad, Jeevan Singh, Kes-Ram (Village Kumhiguda, Berla, Bemetara) v. State of Chhattisgarh (Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection), Collector Bemetara, SDO(R) Berla, District Food Officer Bemetara, and Satya Kabir Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh. Challenge: fair price shop allocation order dated 08.08.2023 in favour of Respondent No. 5. Outcome: petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty; maintainability objection based on alternate efficacious remedy - appeal under Clause 18, Chhattisgarh PDS (Control) Order 2016. No merits adjudication, no precedent engagement. Advocates: Akash Kumar Kundu (petitioners); D.R. Minj, G.A. (Respondent-State).

What did the court decide?

Liberty to withdraw the writ petition and avail the alternate efficacious remedy of appeal under Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.

Why is it important?

Accepting petitioner counsel's submission made in view of the State's alternate-remedy objection, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for (liberty to pursue the appeal under Clause 18, PDS Order, 2016); no adjudication of the allocation dispute occurs in this order. ¶30

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to withdraw the writ petition and avail the alternate efficacious remedy of appeal under Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.

Issue for consideration

Maintainability: whether the writ petition should be entertained when, per the State, the petitioner has the alternate efficacious remedy of appeal under Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. +1 more

Court's answer

Accepting petitioner counsel's submission made in view of the State's alternate-remedy objection, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for (liberty to pursue the appeal under Clause 18, PDS Order, 2016); no adjudication of the allocation dispute occurs in this order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HC Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur (Single Bench - Hon'ble Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge), WPC No. 1054 of 2024, order dated 20/06/2024: Five residents of Village Kumhiguda, Berla, District Bemetara sought a writ of mandamus to set aside the order dated 08.08.2023 allocating a fair price shop to Respondent No. 5 (Satya Kabir Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh) and to stay its operation. State counsel (D.R. Minj, G.A.) objected to maintainability, pointing to the petitioner's alternate efficacious remedy of appeal under Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016; petitioner's counsel (Akash Kumar Kundu) thereupon requested withdrawal with liberty to pursue that appeal. The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. The fairness of the allocation order was not adjudicated in this Court.

A

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

WPC No. 1054 of 2024

Mantram Nishad S/o Duklaha Nishad Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Kumhiguda The. Berla, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

Bhupendra Singh S/o Goverdhan Singh Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Kumhiguda The. Berla, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

Ganesh Nishad S/o Parbhu Nishad Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Kumhiguda The. Berla, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

Jeevan Singh S/o J.M. Rajput Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Kumhiguda The. Berla, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

Kes-Ram S/o Pardesi Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Kumhiguda The. Berla, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

------Petitioners

VERSUS

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, P.O.- Rakhi, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

The Collector, Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

Sub Divisional Officer (R) Berla, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

District Food Officer Bemetara, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

Satya Kabir Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh Village Kamhiguda, Tahsil Berla, District Bemetara Through Secretary Ashwani Manikpuri W/o Doman Das, A/o 34 Years, R/o Village Kumhiguda, Berla, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

------- Respondents

(cause title is taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. Akash Kumar Kundu, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. D.R. Minj, G.A.

SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD

20/06/2024

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

“10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the present case.

10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue the writ of mandamus and set-aside the impugned order dated 08.08.2023 and to hold that the order of allocation of fair price shop in favour of the Respondent No. 5 is bad in law, in the interest of justice.

10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the operation and effect of the impugned order dated 08.08.2023 till the final disposal of the writ petition.

2

10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any other order as it may deem fit, in the interest of justice.”

Learned counsel for the State raises an objection with regard to the maintainability of the petition on the ground that the petitioner is having alternate efficacious remedy of appeal under Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “PDS Order, 2016”) .

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the objection raised by the counsel for the State, he may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to avail the alternate remedy available to him under PDS Order, 2016.

In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

Sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

Dey

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Maintainability: whether the writ petition should be entertained when, per the State, the petitioner has the alternate efficacious remedy of appeal under Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.¶28
The court held
Accepting petitioner counsel's submission made in view of the State's alternate-remedy objection, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for (liberty to pursue the appeal under Clause 18, PDS Order, 2016); no adjudication of the allocation dispute occurs in this order.ratio¶30
2.
Merits (raised, not adjudicated): whether the order dated 08.08.2023 allocating the fair price shop in favour of Respondent No. 5 is bad in law and should be set aside by writ of mandamus.¶24

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016Clause 18¶28 PDS Order, 2016¶29

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 08.08.2023 allocating a fair price shop in favour of Respondent No. 5, challenged by the petitioners as bad in law¶24
08.08.2023
Prior proceeding
Writ petition filed seeking, inter alia, setting aside of the impugned allocation order dated 08.08.2023 and a stay of its operation and effect.¶22
Prior proceeding
State counsel raised a maintainability objection, asserting the petitioners had an alternate efficacious remedy of appeal under Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.¶28
Prior proceeding
In view of the objection, petitioner's counsel submitted that he be permitted to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail the alternate remedy under the PDS Order, 2016.¶29

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Mantram Nishad s/o Duklaha Nishad¶5
Akash Kumar Kundu
petitioner
Bhupendra Singh s/o Goverdhan Singh¶6
petitioner
Ganesh Nishad s/o Parbhu Nishad¶7
petitioner
Jeevan Singh s/o J.M. Rajput¶8
petitioner
Kes-Ram s/o Pardesi¶9
respondent
State of Chhattisgarh (through Secretary, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection)¶12
D.R. Minj
respondent
Collector, Bemetara¶13
respondent
Sub Divisional Officer (R), Berla¶14
respondent
District Food Officer, Bemetara¶15
respondent
Satya Kabir Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh, Village Kamhiguda, Tahsil Berla, District Bemetara (through Secretary Ashwani Manikpuri)¶16

Coram

AI extract

Parth Prateem Sahuauthor¶20

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Chhattisgarh HC
Decided on: 19 Jun 2024 · June
Registered: 19 Feb 2024
Case no.: WPC/1054/2024
CNR: CGHC010040472024
Bench: Parth Prateem Sahu
Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Case type: WPC

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Parth Prateem Sahu

Radhe Sawra Vs State of Chhattisgarh
18 Jun 2024
Shriniwas Singh Thakur Vs State of Chhattisgarh
18 Jun 2024
Deepak Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh
18 Jun 2024
Laxmi Vs State of Chhattisgarh
19 Jun 2024
Parth Debnath Vs State of Chhattisgarh
19 Jun 2024
Hitanshu Rice Mill, Vs State of Chhattisgarh
19 Jun 2024

Cite this judgement

Mantram Nishad v. State of Chhattisgarh, WPC/1054/2024 (CG), decided on 19 June 2024.

The High Court of Chhattisgarh publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016Clause 18 · PDS Order, 2016

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Order dated 08.08.2023 allocating a fair price shop in favour of Respondent No. 5, challenged by the petitioners as bad in law08.08.2023
Writ petition filed seeking, inter alia, setting aside of the impugned allocation order dated 08.08.2023 and a stay of its operation and effect.
State counsel raised a maintainability objection, asserting the petitioners had an alternate efficacious remedy of appeal under Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Parth Prateem Sahu

Parties & counsel