1 2025:CGHC:18627 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2019 of 2025 1 - Vikashsheel Women Self Help Group Khatvabardar Through The Secretary Smt. Tara Devi W/o Jawahar Yadav Aged About 42 Years, Secretary Of Vikashsheel Women Self Help Group- Khatvabardar, R/o Village- Khatvabardar, P.S- Pasta, Tahsil- Doura- Kochali, Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Supply Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur Distt- Raipur (C.G) 2 - The Collector (Food Department) Balrampur Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G) 3 - The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Balrampur Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4 - The Food Inspector- Balrampur Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5 - Gram Panchayat- Padhi Through Secretary Gram Panchayat- Padhi/ Operator Of Govt. Faire Price Shop- Padhi R/o Village- Padhi, P.S- Pasta, Tahsil- Doura- Kochali, Distt- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. A. N. Pandey, Advocate through video conferencing For State/Respondent/s : Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.05.17 12:13:18 +0530 2 Order on Board 24/04/2025 1. Heard Mr. A. N. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing as well as Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, learned Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent/s appearing on advance copy. 2. By the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief/s: “10.1 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside of the impugned order dated 19.2.2025 passed by the learned Collector Balrampur i.e respondent no.2 in Food Appeal no.202411270100006/B-121/2024-25 ANNEXURE P/9 issued by the respondent No.3. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to conclude the show cause proceeding within stipulated period as per provision of Rule 16(1) of Control order 2016". 10.3 Any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioners which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Brief fact of the case is that a Vikashsheel Women Self Help Group -Khatvabardar is the registered group under the Vihan Scheme and petitioner is the Secretary of the Vikashsheel Women Self Help Group Khatvabardar R/o Village- Khatvabardar P.S- Pasta, Tahsil-Doura- Kochali Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G) 3 (ANNEXURE P/1.). As per govt. scheme and fulfill the all terms and condition prescribed under the said scheme, respondent no.3 allotted the Fair Price Shop of Village- Khatvabardar to the petitioner’s group on 07.10.2020. On 06.06.2024, respondent No.4 inspected the Fair Price Shop of petitioner and found some deficiency and submitted the report before the respondent No.3. On the basis of Inspection Report, respondent No.3 issued show cause notice to the petitioner, salesman of the shop on 24.10.2024. The husband of petitioner / salesman of the shop was admitted in hospital at Ambikapur from 17.8.2024 to 28.8.2024 and Secretary of the self help group and salesman of the shop both are in hospital and due to which the notice was not serve to the petitioner and salesman of the shop and on 26.8.2024, notice was serve to the son of the Secretary of self help group and salesman of the shop but he could not inform to the petitioner and salesman of the shop due to which the petitioner could not filed the reply and the respondent No.3, suspended the shop of petitioner on the ground that the petitioner could not filed the reply of the notice (ANNEXURE P/5.). During treatment, the shop was not open by salesman or petitioner then they have inform to the respondent No.4 Food inspector and on the request of petitioner and salesman of the shop, the food Inspector is temporally arrange the distribution of the shop of petitioner and directed to the salesman of the Fair Price Shop - Padhi namely Parwej for distributing the essential food grain to the Rashan Card Holder 4 and from 26 to 29th of August 2024, he has distributed the food grains of the shop of petitioner. During inspection, panchanama was prepared by the Food Inspector and no any deficiency was found in the shop of petitioner and the Nigrani Samiti of the shop of petitioner are regularly inspected the shop of petitioner and not found any irregularly and also the member of Village Panchayat- Khatvabardar has given the Panchnama that the petitioner has operating the shop as per guideline and no any complain against the petitioner shop and any irregularity in the shop of petitioner in the show cause notice some deficiency was mention and which was not serve to the petitioner or salesman of the shop due to which they could not submitted the reply of notice due and the shop of the petitioner has been suspended without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner vide order dated 03.09.2024. Being aggrieved by the suspension order dated 03.09.2024 petitioner filed an appeal before the learned Collector and vide order dated 19.2.2025, learned Collector, dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner without considering the material facts and grounds raised by the petitioner by the impugned order. (ANNEXURE P/9). 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by this petition the petitioner has made limited prayer that the shop of the petitioner was suspended on 03.09.2024, but till date the respondent No.3 has not concluded show cause proceeding under Clause 16 (1) of the Control Order, 2016, therefore, the SDO(R), Balrampur may 5 be directed to conclude the proceedings filed under Clause 16 (1) of the Control Order, 2016, which is pending for consideration before the SDO(R), Balrampur from the date of suspension i.e. 03.09.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the impugned order has been rightly passed and requires no interference by this Hon’ble Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the fact that the shop of the petitioner was suspended on 03.09.2024, but till date the respondent No.3 has not concluded show cause proceeding under Clause 16 (1) of the Control Order, 2016, the respondent No.3/SDO(R), Balrampur is directed to decide the same forthwith as the period prescribed for deciding the same is within 90 days as per Clause 16 (1) of the Control Order, 2016. The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the proceedings. 8. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi