Janak Lal Taram v. State of Chhattisgarh
Case brief
What is this about?
Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; WPC No. 3189/2026 and seventeen allied writ petitions (3246, 3244, 3240, 3230, 3219, 3213, 3211, 3209, 3208, 3206, 3205, 3197, 3195, 3194, 3192, 3191, 3190 of 2026); paddy procurement centre in-charge/manager; dryage/dryness shortage recovery; Zero Shortage; FIR threat; coercive recovery; MARKFED; Kharif Marketing Session 2025-26; tri-party agreement not executed; clause 15.9; clause 16.3; clause 5.6; arbitration Clause 13; alternative efficacious remedy; relegation to arbitration; no opinion on merits; petitions disposed; Rice Millers 5% dryness allowance; 3% dryness benefit 2022; Mohla Manpur Ambagarh Chowki; Surajpur; Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti; no precedent cited or relied upon.
What did the court decide?
None of the substantive reliefs (dryness-shortage protection, reimbursement of expenditure incurred after 31 March, zero-shortage incentive, cessation of coercion/harassment, enquiry into liability) was granted; the petitions were disposed of with the petitioners relegated to arbitration under Clause 13 of the Agreement and the concerned authorities directed to consider and decide any such arbitration reference in accordance with law, without expression of opinion on merits.