Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21945 (CHH)

M/S RAJ AGRO PRODUCTS MILL, v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/2029/2019 · 2025-04-02

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

-1- 2025:CGHC:15426 NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2029 of 2019 M/s Raj Agro Products Mill, Through Proprietor Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, S/o Late Shri Haridas Gupta, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Vaishali Pride, 209, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur , District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chhattisgarh State Co - Operative Marketing Federation Limited, Through The Managing Director, 880, Civil Lines Raipur, District Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - District Marketing officer, Chhattisgarh State Co - Operative Marketing Federation Limited, Near Ram Mandir, Tilak Nagar, Bilaspur District Bilaspur, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Collector, Bilaspur District - Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Food Controller, office of The Collector (Food) Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation, Limited Through The Managing Director, Civil Lines, Raipur , District Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- For Petitioner : Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate For State : Mr. Ranbir Singh Marhas, Additional Advocate General For Respondents No.2 & 3 : Mr. Harshal Chouhan, Advocate For Respondent No.6 : Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 02.04.2025 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 To call for the entire records pertaining to the petitioners' case for the kind perusal of the Hon'ble Court. 10.2 To quash the direction passed by respondent secretary whereby petitioner is directed to supply 3800 quintal rice to the respondent MARKFED without any basis. 10.3 To direct the respondent to pay milling charges of year 2013-14 & 2014-15, make payment of surplus supplied 637 quintal rice of year 2013-14 & 277.70 quintal rice by petitioner for year 2014-15, make payment of transportation charges of rice & paddy for the year 2013- 14 & 2014-15, make payment for compensation of non- supply of 2154.45 quintal paddy for year 2013-14 & 46000 quintal paddy for the year 2014-15, make payment of rice milling commission for year 2013-14 & 2014-15. Thus totaling the above claims of petitioner the total amount comes to Rs.1.33 Crore which is required to be paid by the MARKFED to the petitioner with 18% yearly interest in the interest of justice, within stipulated period. 10.4 Grant any other relief(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in favour of petitioner, which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest -3- of justice. 10.5 Cost of the petition.” 2) Since an efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner to prefer an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the present writ petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, the instant petition is hereby dismissed. 3) However, the petitioner is at liberty to avail the remedy available under the law. 4) Certified copy, if any, be returned to the petitioner after retaining its xerox copy. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge NADIM