Devendra Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:16733

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 1648 of 2022

¶6

VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHABEOHAR Date: 2025.04.09 18:54:04 +0530

¶7

1 - Devendra Chandrakar S/o Shri Bhupendranath Chandrakar Aged About 34 Years Occupation Incharge Paddy Procurement Center Temri (Reg. No. 1392), R/o Village Bundeli, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh, Mobile No. 8770537228.

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

2 - Collector Mungeli, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

3 - Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Marketing Federation Limited, 6th Floor, Tower-C, Commercial Complex Cbd, Sector 21, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶13

4 - Assistant Registrar Co-Operative Societies Mungeli, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

5 - District Marketing Officer Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Vipadan Sangh

¶15

2

¶16

Maryadit Mungeli, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.

¶17

6 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit Nehru Chowk Bilaspur, Police Station Civil Line, Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

¶18

... Respondents

¶19

(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)

¶20

For Petitioner :- Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For State :- Ms. Anuja Sharma, P.L. For Respondent No. 6 :- Ms. Seema Verma, Advocate on behafl fo Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Advocate

¶21

SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶22

Order On Board

¶23

09.04.2025

¶24

1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:-

¶25

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records of the case, from the authorities.

¶26

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the notice dated 12.03.2022 issued by respondent no. 4 (Annexure-P/1), is in the interest of justice.

¶27

10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.”

¶28

3

¶29

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the order dated 12.03.2025 was a show cause notice for issuance of departmental enquiry against the petitioner as per Section 53(B) of the C.G. Cooperative Societies Act,1960. They submit that since the petition is filed on the basis of the aforesaid show cause notice dated 12.03.2025, as such, this petition would not be maintainable.

¶30

3. Upon which, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the order itself, the deficit of paddy etc. has been stated, as such, even it is a punitive order, it has been passed without hearing the petitioner and without considering the grievance of the petitioner.

¶31

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and from bare perusal of the order dated 12.03.2022, it is quite apparent that the petitioner is required to go before the concerned authorities to submit his reply to participate in the proceeding which has been contemplated under the Act as per notice dated 12.03.2022. As such, present is not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶32

5. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.

¶33

6. Interim relief granted earlier vide order dated 05.04.2022 is hereby

¶34

vacated.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶37

Vishakha