1 2025:CGHC:8583 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2179 of 2022 1 - Smt. Sunita Singh W/o Sukhsagar Singh, Aged About 42 Years Sarpanch Of Village Panchayat Mehuli/ Operator Of Faire Price Shop Village Mehuli Block- Ramchandrapur, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Bhupendra Kumar Singh S/o Shiv Kumar Singh Aged About 26 Years Salesman Of Faire Price Shop- Mehuli, Block Ramchandarpur, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Supply Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector (Food Department) Balrampur, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Food Inspector Ramchandrapur, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.02.21 10:37:50 +0530 2 5 - Jitendra Pal Working On The Post Of Assistant Grade 3/ Dealing Clerk Of Faire Price Shop Posted At Office Of Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Operator of Govt. Faire Price Shop Of Gamhariya, Block Ramchandarpur, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Mayur Khandelwal, Panel lawyer. For Respondent No.5 : Mr. Ravi Kumar Bhagat, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 19/02/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the order dated 22.04.2022 (Annexure P-1), by which, the respondent No.3 by exercising his power under Clause 16 (1) of the Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, suspended the allotment of fair price shop to the petitioner and by the same order it was attached to the respondent No.6. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of suspension has been passed by the respondent/SDO on the ground that the petitioner has failed to reply to the show cause notice issued to him on 04/04/2022. He further submits that though the petitioner approached the authority for filing reply to the said show cause notice, but the Dealing Clerk of the SDO/respondent refused to take the reply to the show cause 3 notice, hence, the order impugned is bad in law. 3. Learned State counsel submits that the order of suspension is under Clause 16 (1) of Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2016, which has been passed by the SDO/respondent No.3, as the petitioner failed to submit reply/explanation to the show cause notice issued to him. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order dated 22/04/2024 (Annexure P-1). 5. From perusal of impugned order dated 22/04/2024 (Annexure P-1), it reflects that the petitioner failed to explain or file reply to the show cause notice issued to him on 04/04/2022. Also, there is an interim order continuing in favour of the petitioner passed by this Court on 09/05/2022, by which, the impugned order dated 22/04/2024 has been stayed till the next date of hearing. 6. Looking to the fact that the impugned order has been passed by the SDO/respondent No.3 only on the ground that the petitioner failed to submit a reply/explanation to the show cause notice issued to him, hence, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to submit a reply to the show cause notice issued to him dated 04/04/2022 to the SDO/respondent No.3 within a period of 15 days from today and on filing of application within a stipulated period, the SDO/respondent No.3 shall consider the same and pass an 4 appropriate order in accordance with law by considering the reply submitted by the petitioner to the show cause notice within a further period of 15 days, till then i.e. period of 30 days, the interim order granted by this Court on 09/05/2022 shall remain operative. 7. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep