Maa Mangala Self Help Group, Puri v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC14 Aug 2025WP(C)/10186/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, Cuttack — W.P.(C) No. 10186 of 2025, order dated 14.08.2025, Justice Sashikanta Mishra. Fair Price Shop Dealer selection under PDS among Self Help Groups; discrepancy in gradation marks (13 against maximum 10); selection process not transparent and contrary to guidelines; writ petition disposed of with direction to Sub-Collector and Licensing Authority, Puri to re-visit selection; selection order dated 07.02.2025 quashed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with direction to the Sub-Collector and Licensing Authority, Puri to re-visit the selection of SHGs for engagement as Fair Price Shop Dealer in a transparent and legally acceptable manner; selection order dated 07.02.2025 quashed. ¶¶19

Maa Mangala Self Help Group, Puri Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 10186 of 2025

¶2

Maa Mangala Self Help Group, Puri

¶3

…. Petitioner

¶4

Represented by Mr. N. Rath, Advocate

¶5

-Versus –

¶6

State of Odisha and Others

¶7

…. Opp. Parties

¶8

Represented by Mr. S.S. Routray, ASC

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

¶10

ORDER_ 14.08.2025

¶11

Order No. 7

¶12

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶13

The petitioner is a Self Help Group (SHG). Pursuant to advertisement dated 22.10.2024 for selection of a Fair Price Shop for dealing with the PDS commodities, the petitioner group was one of the applicants. After a selection process, opposite party No.8 was selected as per order dated 07.02.2025. The petitioner challenges such selection on the ground that the process of selection was not transparent and contrary to the guidelines. Moreover, the comparative gradation of the SHGs was made wrongly. The State has filed a counter justifying the selection of Opposite Party No.8

¶14

Heard Mr. Nihal Rath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. S.S. Rout, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State. None appears for the Opposite Party No.8 despite valid service.

¶15

Referring to Annexure-D/7 enclosed to the counter affidavit filed by the State, Mr.Rath points out several discrepancies in the

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

award of marks under different heads. For instance, under SL. No. 3 even though the maximum marks to be awarded under such head is 10, the Opposite Party No.8 has been awarded 13 marks. Similar discrepancies have been pointed out under other heads.

¶18

Mr. Rath fairly submits that his client has also been awarded marks not in consonance with the guidelines. As such, the selection process appears to be vitiated.

¶19

In such view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Sub-Collector and Licensing Authority, Puri to re-visit the process of selection of SHGs for engagement as Fair Price Shop Dealer in a transparent and legally acceptable manner. Consequently, the order dated 07.02.2025 is hereby quashed.

¶20

( Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

¶21

B.C. Tudu

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed Signed by: BHIGAL CHANDRA TUDU Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cutt ack Date: 18-Aug-2025 10:35:23

¶24

Page 2 of 2

Maa Mangala Self Help Group, Puri v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maa Mangala Self Help Group, Puri v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalpana Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Sapina Bibi Vs State of Odisha

Sujata Jena Vs State of Odisha

Amrita Panda Vs State of Odisha

Sudhamayee Kumar Vs State of Odisha

Ashok Khatua @ Ashok Kumar Khatua Vs Binay Kumar Khatua