1 2025:CGHC:25456 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2169 of 2020 1 - Smt Teejo Devi W/o Shri Jivan Singh Aged About 50 Years President Of Mahamaya Women Self Help Group Village Sendur / Assistant Seller Of Govt. Fair Price Shop Of Village Sendur Block Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., 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., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector (Food Department) Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Food Inspector Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Govt. Faire Price Shop Tatapani Block Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Akanksha Vishwakarma, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. A.N. Pandey, Adv. For Respondent/State : Shri Prateek Tiwari, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 18.06.2025 REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s) : “10.1 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside of the impugned order dated 27.8.2020 ANNEXURE P/1 issued by the respondent no.3 10.2 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no.3 to allow to continue of the petitioner group for running the fair price shop of Village- Sendur Block - Balrampur Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G) as per allotment order dated 29.6.2015 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court was please to hold an enquiry in respect of suspension of the shop of petitioner by the respondent authorities. 10.4 Any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. The facts of the present case are that a Fair Price Shop was allotted to the petitioner group by respondent No. 3 on 29.06.2015. In the year 2020, respondent No. 4 inspected the Fair Price Shop of the petitioner and found certain deficiencies and a report was submitted before respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 3 issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner on 13.08.2020. The petitioner filed a reply to the show-cause notice and denied its contents. Respondent No. 3 passed the order impugned and suspended the allotment of the Fair Price Shop vide order dated 27.08.2020. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a show-cause notice was issued on 13.08.2020 and the reply was filed by the petitioner and on 27.08.2020, the order impugned was passed, but the authority failed to consider the submissions made by the 3 petitioner in its reply. She would also submit that the authority has stated that the reply filed by the petitioner was found unsatisfactory and took the decision to place the Fair Price Shop allotted to the petitioner under suspension. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that after receiving complaints against the petitioner group, a show-cause notice was issued, but the petitioner could not file a reply in the given time. He would further submit that the authority concerned has taken into consideration the reply filed by the petitioner and the same is evident from the contents of the order dated 27.08.2020. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. From a perusal of the documents placed on the record, it is quite vivid that the petitioner was allotted a Fair Price Shop in the Village Sendur, Block Balrampur in the year 2015. After receiving complaints, an enquiry was conducted and a report was submitted by respondent No. 4 before respondent No. 3, thereafter, on 13.08.2020 a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner, to which the petitioner filed reply and thereafter respondent No. 3 passed the order impugned on 27.08.2020. 7. From a perusal of the order impugned, it is apparent that the submissions made by the petitioner in reply to show-cause notice -4- have not been taken into consideration and further, the enquiry report was also not supplied which was conducted behind the back of the petitioner. The order impugned was passed in a cryptic manner, therefore, the order (Annexure P/1) dated 27.08.2020 is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the concerned authority to decide the matter of the petitioner group afresh after affording due opportunity of petitioner. At the same time, the authority shall provide all necessary documents including enquiry report to the petitioner. 8. With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), the present petition is disposed of. 9. Interim order granted earlier is hereby vacated. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha