1 2025:CGHC:46155 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4820 of 2025 1 - Adim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Arandi District- Kondagaon C.G. Through Samiti Manager Prabhuram Jain Aged About 60 Years, S/o Charansingh Resident Of Tendubhata, Arandi Keshkal Dist- Kondagaon (C.G.) 2 - Prabhuram Jain S/o Charab Singh Aged About 60 Years Resident Of Tendubhata, Arandi Keshkal, Dist- Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union Of India Through Secretary Ministry Of Consumer Affairs Food And Public Distribution Department Krishi Bhawan New Delhi 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Naw Raipur Atal Nagar Dist- Raipur C.G. 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Co- Operative Society Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, New Raipur Atal Nagar Dist- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Collector Kondagaon Dist- Kondagaon C.G. 5 - Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Co- Operative Marketing Federation Limited 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex Cbd Sector 21 Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District- Raipur C.G. 6 - District Marketing Officer Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Vipdan Sangh Maryadit District- Kondagaon C.G. 7 - Assistant Registrar/ Commissioner Cooperative Societies Kondagaon District Kondagaon C.G. 8 - Nodal Officer Zila Sahakri Kendriya Bank Maryadit District- Kondagaon C.G. 9 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit Jagdalpur, Behind Jhankar Talkies Kewramunda Ward Jagdalpur, District- Bastar (C.G.) 10 - Nodal Officer / Assistant Commissioner Co-Operative District- Kondagaon C.G. ... Respondent(s) 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners : Mr. Chakresh Tiwari, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate For Respondent -UOI : Ms. Anmol Sharma, Advocate with Ms. Sakshi Bali, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. GA. For Respondent-MARKFED : Mr. RK Jha, Advocate. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 10.09.2025 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition with following reliefs: “10. RELIEF (S) SOUGHT:- 10.1 A writ and/ or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue calling the records from the respondent authorities concerned pertaining to case of the petitioner for perusal of this Hon'ble Court, if thinks fit in the facts & circumstances of case. 10.2 A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue quashing the Order dated 19.08.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the respondent no. 9 in the facts and circumstances and further pleased to direct the respondents to exempt the petitioner society from the recovery of the said shortage which has been caused due to delay in lifting by respondents and further pleased to direct the respondents to count the said shortage in driage (Sukhat). 10.3 A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue restraining the respondents from adopting the unlawful act for the recovery of the loss which is due to the respondents own fault. 10.4 A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue directing the respondent to follow the policy framed in this regard for the resolution of the dispute. 10.5 Cost of the proceedings. 10.6 Any other writs and directions that may be deemed fit and just in the facts & circumstances of case.” 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are holding the post of ‘Manager’ and also worked as In-charge of Paddy Procurement Centre as mentioned in cause title of the writ petition. Petitioners have purchased the paddy under the Policy formulated by the respondents. According to the tripartite agreement entered into between the parties, last / cut-off date for lifting of paddy in the kharif season 2024-25 was till 31.01.2025, accordingly, petitioners have purchased the paddy. In the said agreement entered into between the parties, it is an obligation on the part of the respondent -Marketing Federation to lift the paddy from the Procurement Centre and to store in particular place within specified period. However, respondents- Marketing Federation failed to lift paddy purchased by petitioners- society within specified time from the date of its purchase. Entire paddy purchased by society was dumped in the open sky at Paddy Procurement Centre under direct sunlight due to which moisture of paddy dried and had suffered loss of weight. He further contended that after lifting and transportation of paddy from Paddy Procurement Centre, the petitioners are being harassed and threatened by the respondent-authorities through the Police administration by calling them in the police station, keeping them sitting there for whole day and also threatening to register case against them, without following the due procedure as provided under the Policy formulated by the State Government, providing the petitioners an opportunity to explain as to whether, there is any loss or not. Petitioners are also being called by the authorities and being threatened to fulfill the loss due to shortage of paddy, without there being any proper assessment of the shortage. The action on the part of respondents is per se illegal and arbitrary, 4 petitioners were not issued any show cause notice nor given any intimation as to what was the actual loss. He also contended that earlier also similar actions were taken against which several writ petitions were filed in which this Court taking note of the clauses of agreement had permitted petitioner therein to avail remedy of arbitration under Clause- 13 of the agreement and till decision of proceedings under the arbitration to be submitted before the Collector, interest of petitioner therein were also protected. He submits that case of petitioners are also on similar footing and, therefore, similar order may be passed in their favor. 3. Learned counsels for the respective respondents opposes the submission of learned counsel for petitioners and submits that upon completion of upliftment and transportation of paddy purchased by petitioners at Paddy Procurement Centre, shortage of paddy was found, petitioners could not able to give proper and satisfactory reply and therefore, the proceeding have been initiated. However, they do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for petitioners based on Clause 5.6 and 13 of tripartite agreement. They also do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for petitioners based on the order passed by this Court in similar writ petitions. Learned Counsels also submit that as the loss of paddy is causing loss of State exchequer, and therefore, the Collector has issued a direction to initiate appropriate proceedings for recovery of amount towards the loss of aforementioned quantity of paddy or for recovery of aforementioned quantity of paddy, hence, the action cannot be said to be arbitrary or illegal. 4. I have heard learned counsels for the respective parties and also perused the copy of tripartite agreement enclosed alongwith this writ 5 petition. 5. The grievance of the petitioners is mainly that no action can be taken against the petitioners in the individual capacity if for any reason there is shortage in the quantity of paddy and that too unless and until some inquiry is conducted. Clause 5.6 of the Agreement reads as under: "5.6- विपणन संघ द्वा रा प्रदा य की गई रा शि सं उप र्जन की न्द्र (संमिवि) द्वा रा धा न विपणन संघ की की प्र प् होन परा ष रा शि की संली$ संमिवि की प्रदा य की$न ए अन्य अन'सं विगकी दा( सं रा शि की कीटौ*$ की र्ज ग$ । इसंकी उपरा भी$ सं.ली$ यग्य रा शि ष राहोन परा जिर्जली विपणन अमिधाकी रा$ द्वा रा छ.ग. रा ज्य संहोकी रा$ संसं यटौ3 अमिधाविनय 1960 की अग सं.ली$ की य हो$ हो' संक्ष न्य य लीय 5 प्रकीराण दार्ज विकीय र्ज ग ।" 6. Clause 13 of the Agreement provides for arbitration of the dispute between the parties, reads as under :- "13- आर्बि89ट्रेन :- इसं अन'8धा की विकीसं$ भी$ कीण्डि<=की सं सं8मिधा वि दा उत्पन्न होन की ण्डि@वि 5 वि दा की विनणय हो' जिर्जली 5 जिर्जली कीलीक्टौरा की विनणय अन्तिन् होग र्ज उभीयपक्ष( की न्य होग । कीलीक्टौरा द्वा रा दिदाय गय विनणय की अप$ली उभीयपक्ष( द्वा रा सं8मिधा जिर्जली की संभी ग$य आय'क् की की र्ज संकी ग$। 7. Under clause 5.6 of the Agreement, there is specific provision as to the recovery of the loss suffered by the Marketing Federation to be made from the concerned Society, wherein primarily, it is to be recovered from the commission and other heads for which the Society is entitled, for their services rendered in paddy procurement. If further amount is left, then the recovery proceedings is to be initiated under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. 8. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, aforementioned relevant clauses of the agreement as also considering the copy of the policy formulated by the State Govt. which is placed before this Court for consideration, this writ petition is disposed of with a 6 permission to the petitioner to file representation before the Collector in terms of Clause 14 of the Agreement within a period of ‘03 weeks’ from today. The Collector, in turn, shall adjudicate upon the grounds raised by the writ petitioners and will also be at liberty to invoke Clause -14 of the proforma agreement and to pass order on the said representation at the earliest after receipt of such representation. The petitioners are also directed to cooperate in the proceedings of the inquiry, if any, conducted by respondent -authority. 9. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are being threatened for taking coercive action against them if he fails to meet out the shortage of paddy, therefore, it is directed that if the petitioners submit the representation within specified time then no coercive steps shall be taken against them till decision on their representation. CC as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-