2025:JHHC:10790 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.735 of 2025 ----- 1. Prabhawati Devi, W/o Jawahar Singh. 2. Fulmaniya Devi, W/o Late Govind Singh 3. Saroj Devi, W/o Shivnath Singh. All residents of village Bijka, P.O. Ramkanda, P.S. Bhandaria, District Garhwa. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 2. Secretary, Department of Food, Public Distribution & Consumer Affairs, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 3. State Food Commission Jharkhand, through its Chairman, having its office at 2nd Floor, Jharkhand Rajya Awash Board Building, Harmu Housing Colony, Ranchi. 4. Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa. 5. District Supply Officer, Garhwa. 6. Block Development Officer, Bhandaria, District Garhwa. 7. Gulab Swayan Sahayata Samuh, through its Secretary, Village Bijka, P.O. Ramkanda, P.S. Bhandaria, District Garhwa. 8. Ishwar Dayal Yadav, Village Bijka, P.O. Ramkanda, P.S. Bhandaria, District Garhwa. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Shailesh Poddar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Prakash, AC to SC-VII ----- Order No.05 Date: 08.04.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to forthwith provide ration to the petitioners as per their entitlement under the provisions of National Food Security Act, 2013 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the Act, 2013’). Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to submit a detailed report with respect to the action taken on the complaint made by the petitioners regarding non-disbursement of entitled quantity of ration to them. The petitioners have also prayed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to pay appropriate compensation to them 2025:JHHC:10790 2 for undue hardship and deprivation being suffered by them due to non-disbursement of entitled ration for more than one year. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners belong to scheduled tribe and are the holders of Priority Household Card (P.H. Card) issued to them under the provisions of the Act, 2013. They are entitled to get ration @ 5 kg. per month at subsidized rate under Public Distribution System, however, local PDS dealers i.e. respondent nos.7 and 8 have refused to give them sanctioned ration since January, 2024. The petitioner, her husband and her three minor children are dependent on farming and forest produce. The petitioner no.2 is a widow and she has one son and one daughter and presently, she is living with her daughter-in-law, as her children have gone outside to work as migrant labourers. The petitioner no.3 has three children, out of them two are minor and her husband does farming and collects forest produce for survival. 3. It is further submitted that despite being PH Card holders, the petitioners have not been provided their entitled ration since January, 2024. The local PDS dealers forced the petitioners to accept less ration and to acknowledge receiving of full ration and when they protested, they have been denied the ration altogether. The said prolonged non-disbursement of ration has caused severe hardship to the petitioners and they are struggling to meet their basic nutritional requirements. The continuous denial of foodgrains despite being legally entitled reflects gross inaction on the part of 2025:JHHC:10790 3 the concerned authorities and the same violates the provisions of Act, 2013. 4. It is also submitted that the said problem is being faced by 45 other families of the village and to that effect a joint representation/ complaint dated 11th June, 2024 was submitted before the District Grievance Redressal Officer-cum-Additional Collector, Garhwa under Section 15 of the said Act, however, no action was taken in that regard. Hence the present writ petition. 5. Mr. Suraj Prakash, learned AC to SC-VII appearing on behalf of the State respondents submits that the aforesaid grievance of the petitioners will be looked into by the competent authority i.e. respondent no.4. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition, this Court is of the view that the same is required to be looked into by the competent authority i.e. respondent no.4 at the first instance. Hence, the petitioners are given liberty to prefer a fresh representation raising their grievance before the respondent no.4. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no.4 after getting an enquiry conducted as well as on providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioners/their representatives, shall take appropriate decision/step within two months from the date of filing of the representation. 7. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Sanjay/