1 2025:CGHC:11539 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 444 of 2021  Maa Mahamaya Samuh, Bahrachi Through Secretary, Smt. Sunita Yadav, W/o Sunil Yadav, Aged About 38, Years, R/o Village Bahrachi, Tahsil Bharatpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Development, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. Collector (Women And Child Development Department) District Korea Chhattisgarh 3. The District Programme Officer Women And Child Development, Korea Chhattisgarh 4. The Project Officer Bharatpur District Korea Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. N.P. Thakur, Advocate on behalf of Mr. T. K. Jha, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Lav Sharma, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 07/03/2025 1) By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following relief(s):- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records relating to this case. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and quash the order dated 23.11.2020 Annexure P/4 and also the advertisement relating to inviting the proposals (Annexure P/5 (dated 21.12.2020) for supply of work of ready to eat food for Aanganbadi centre Bahrachi located in Bharatpur Tahsil being illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in law, in the facts and circumstances of the case. AJINKYA PANSARE Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2025.03.07 17:11:45 +0530 2 10.3 That any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper together with cost of the petition. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an advertisement was issued by the District Program Officer, Women and Child Development, District-Koriya for supply of hot-cooked meals to the Anganwadi Centres in the year 2018 for period of five years from 06.10.2018 to 05.10.2023. He further submits that work was allotted to the petitioner but without assigning any reason, the contract was terminated vide order dated 23.11.2020. He also submits that this Court vide order dated 03.02.2021 has granted interim protection in favor of petitioner. He prays to quash the termination order dated 23.11.2020. 3) On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes. He submits that work order for supply of hot-cooked meals was issued in favor of the petitioner for a period of five years from 06.10.2018 to 05.10.2023 and the period of agreement has expired. 4) Heard. 5) Taking into consideration the fact that the work order was issued for supply of hot-cooked meals to the Anganwadi centres for a period of five years from 06.10.2018 till 05.10.2023 and that period has already expired, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, nothing survives for adjudication. 6) Consequently, this petition stands dismissed being rendered infructuous. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya