1 2025:CGHC:2332 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4294 of 2024 1 - Namami Gange Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh Through- President Darasmati W/o Late Ghambhir Prasad Aged About 65 Years, R/o Village-Kaya, Tahsil-Bodri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The Collector District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Bilha, Tahsil-Bilha, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Block Education Officer, Bilha, Tahsil- Bilha, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - The Head Master, Govt. Primary School Village Kaya, Village Kaya, Tahsil- Bodri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Sarpanch Village Kaya, Tahsil-Bodri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 7 - Jay Maa Sitla Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh Through- Its President, R/o Village-Kaya, Tahsil- Bodri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Badruddin Khan, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No.6. : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate. Hon'ble Justice Shri Bibhu Datta Guru Order on Board AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.01.20 13:46:30 +0530 2 14/01/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner who has been assigned the work of supply of preparation of mid-day meal in the Government Primary School, Village Kaya, but vide impugned order AnnexureP-1 dated 15/03/2024, the Block Education Officer cancelled the said assignment given to the petitioner and the said work has been allotted to the respondent No.7. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Block Education Officer has taken action against the petitioner on the basis of some complaint made by the Gram Panchayat and the Headmaster of the school. It has been reflected in the order that some enquiry was made and then the order impugned has been passed for cancellation of the work assigned to the petitioner. He further submits that before issuance of cancellation order Annexure P-1, no notice was issued to the petitioner and no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner, even the petitioner has no knowledge about any enquiry done against him and if such enquiry has been done, that must have been behind the back of the petitioner, hence, the impugned action of the Block Education Officer is contrary to law and principles of natural justice. 3. Learned counsel for the State/respondent as well as the counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 submits that the work of supply of mid-day meal was allotted to the petitioner, but on the complaint 3 of the Gram Panchayat and the Headmaster of the school, some enquiry was conducted and the work assigned to the petitioner has been cancelled and the same work has been allotted to the respondent No.7. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. 5. From perusal of the impugned order dated 15/03/2024, it appears that some enquiry was conducted behind the back of the petitioner and without issuing any notice and without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned order has been passed, which is contrary to the principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned order Annexure P-1 dated 15/03/2024 is liable to be and is hereby quashed and the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty given to the Block Education Officer/respondent to take appropriate steps by providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before taking any action against the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the writ petition is disposed with the aforesaid liberty to the Block Education Officer/respondent. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep