Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 38713 (CHH)

SMT. FULMANIYA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/4366/2025 · 2025-08-13

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:41058 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4366 of 2025 1 - Smt. Fulmaniya W/o Rajesh Aged About 38 Years The President, Saheli Mahila Swa Sahayata Smooh Ara, Balrampur, Tahsil- Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Food, Public Distribution And Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur District Raipur C.G. 2 - Collector, Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer, Revenue, Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. 4 - Food Inspector, Revenue, Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. ----Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 14/08/2025 Heard 1. This petition has been filed assailing the order dated 28.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.2-Collector Balrampur- Ramanujganj, whereby, a Fair Price Shop allotted to the petitioner vide the order dated 20.3.2015 has been restrained from running the shop. 2 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the State would submit that under Clause 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public District System (Control) Order, 2004, any person aggrieved by an order passed by the Collector may appeal before the State Government within 30 days of the receipt of the order and it’s decision shall be final. However, the petitioner, without availing the said alternative remedy, directly approached this Court, therefore, the petition is not maintainable. 3. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner contented that the impugned order has not been passed against the petitioner but the order is against the salesmen of the petitioner. 4. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that there is alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under clause 18(2) of the Chhattisgarh Public District System (Control) Order, 2004, therefore I am inclined to entertain the petition. However the petitioner is at liberty to file appeal before the State Government under clause 18(2) of the Chhattisgarh Public District System (Control) Order, 2004 5. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti