-1- 2025:CGHC:5858 NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2730 of 2019 Maa Mahamaya Swa Sahayata Samuh Nevsa, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh Through I6ts Member Namely Amrika Bai W/o Shri Govind Ram Aged About 52 Years, Caste Teli, (President) Urmila, Bai, W/o Shri Rajkumar, Ageg About 38 Years, Caste Teli, (Member) and Bahatarin Bai, W/o Shri Hetram Aged About 50 Years Caste Teli (Member) All Are R/o Village Nevsa, Police Station Ratanpur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner Versus 1- State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Food and Agriculturer, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2- Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3- Sub Divisional officer (Revenue) Revenue Sub Divisional Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4- Block Education officer Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 5- Chief Execution officer Janpad Panchayat Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 6- Adarsh Mahila Swa- Sahyata Samuh Nevsa Through President Sahetrin Bai Sahu, W/o Ganesh Ram Sahu Aged About 55 Years and Secretary, Dharam Bai Kashyap Aged About 54 Years, both are R/o Village Nevsa, Police Station Ratanpur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Syed Afaque Hussain Rizvi, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. Lavkush Kumar Sahu, Advocate For State : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General For Private Respondents : None -2- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 31.01.2025 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- (I) that, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the petitioner’s case, in the interest of justice. (II) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside impugned order dated 21.02.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Collector Bilaspur in case no. 06/B-121/2018-2019 arising out of order dated 29.08.2018 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in revenue case no.32/B-121/2017-2018, in the interest of justice. (III) That, this Honble Court may kindly be pleased to issue the order, writ or directions to the respondent authorities to allow the work petitioner's Samuh for the Mid-day-meal at Govt. Middle School Nevsa, P.S. Ratanpur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (C.G.) on the basis of allotment of the Block Education Officer Bilha, District Bilaspur to the petitioner, in the interest of justice. (IV) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 2) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits as follows:- A. The petitioner, a self-help group, was allotted a work order for the supply of mid-day meals to various schools. The work order issued in favor of the petitioner group for supply of mid day meal to Government Middle School, Gram Panchayat Nevsa, Tehsil and District Bilaspur, was canceled by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) vide order dated 29.08.2018. -3- B. The petitioner challenged the cancellation order by filing an appeal under the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short, the Act, 1993). However, the Collector, District Bilaspur, vide order dated 21.02.2019, dismissed the appeal on the ground that the appeal preferred under the provisions of the Act, 1993 is not maintainable. C. It is argued that since the order was issued by the SDO(R), the appeal was maintainable before the Collector according to the provisions of Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam. He prays for the quashing of the order dated 21.02.2019 and further seeks a direction to the concerned Collector to decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner in accordance with the law. 3) Mr. Vinay Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the State, opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. He submits that against the order passed by the SDO(R), the petitioner group should have preferred an appeal within 45 days according to the clause 1(3) of the notification/circular dated 07.08.2012, issued by the State Government before the concerned Collector. Therefore, the District Collector rightly dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner under the Chhattisgarh Panchayati Raj Adhiniyam. 4) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record. 5) The State Government with regard to distribution of mid-day meal in schools by the Self-Help-Group or village level institutions, issued circular/notification on 07.08.2012. The clause-1(1)(2)(3) of the notification/circular is reproduced as under:- -4- under:- “1. संचालनकर्ताा समितिर्ताकामिनर्धाा रण :- 1. ध्यान्ह भोजन योजना का संचालन शाला स्र्तार पर यथा संभव मिहला स्व. सहायर्ताा सूहोंके द्वारा मिकया जावेगा। जहां स्व. सहायर्ताा सूह उपलब्र्धा न हो वहां योजना संचालन का काय स्थानीय स्र्तार पर उपलब्र्धा अन्य ग्रा स्र्तारीय संस्थाओं से मिकयाजावेगा। 2. थाना स्र्तार पर संचालनकर्ताा समितिर्ता का मिनर्धाा रण संबंतिर्धार्ता क्षेत्र के अनुमिवभागीय अतिर्धाकारी राजस्व के द्वारा मिकया जावेगा। पूव से काय रर्ता् समितिर्ता को यमि- अमिनयमिर्तार्ताा आमि- के आर्धाार पर -ोषी जार्ताा, है र्ताो जांच कर मिनयानुसार अंतिर्ता मिनण य लेने, पूव संस्था को परिरवर्तिर्तार्ता करने या नई समितिर्ता का मिनर्धाा रण करने का काय भी अनुमिवभागीय अतिर्धाकारी के द्वारा मिकया जावेगा। उक्त काय5के लिलए, एर्ता- द्वारा: संबंतिर्धार्ता क्षेत्र के अनुमिवभागीयअतिर्धाकारीकोअतिर्धाकृ र्तामिकयाजार्तााहै। 3. अनुमिवभागीय अतिर्धाकारीके मिनण यसे यमि-कोईपक्षकार असंर्ताुष्टहो र्ताो परिरवा-ीपक्षकार के द्वारा अनुमिवभागीय अतिर्धाकारी के आ-ेश के मिवरूद्ध45 मि-नोंके भीर्तार जिजला कलेक्टर को अभ्यावे-न प्रस्र्ताुर्ता मिकया जावेगा। ऐसे अभ्यावे-न पर जिजला कलेक्टर द्वारा लिलया गया मिनण यअंतिर्ताहोगा।" 6) It is an admitted fact that the petitioner group was granted a work order for the supply of mid- day meals to the Government School. Upon receiving certain complaints, an inquiry was conducted, and the SDO(R), Bilaspur, vide order dated 29.08.2018, canceled the allotment order issued in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner group, however, preferred an appeal before the Collector under the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, but as per Clause 1(3) of the circular/notification dated 07.08.2012 issued by the Chhattisgarh Government, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur, Kramank F-17- 50/2012/20-1, there is a provision to prefer an appeal before the Collector. Since there was an efficacious alternative remedy available to the petitioner to prefer -5- an appeal under Clause 1(3) of the circular/notification dated 07.08.2012, the petitioner preferred an appeal under the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, which was not maintainable, and the Collector has rightly dismissed the appeal of the petitioner. 7) Accordingly, this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner group to prefer an appeal before the Collector, District Bilaspur, under Clause 1(3) of the circular/notification dated 07.08.2012. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim