1 2025:CGHC:49386 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5148 of 2025 1 - Pragati Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh Kurmibhauna Through Its President Smt. Pushpa Behra W/o Shri Dambodar Behra Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Kurmibhauna Tahsil Gharghoda, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Ptotection Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Gharghoda, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Assistant Food Officer Gharghoda, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Mahalaxmi Swa Sahayata Samuh Kotrimal Through Its President Village Kotrimal, Tahsil Gharghoda, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 26/09/2025 1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Gharghoda, District Raigarh, whereby government Fair Price Shop allotted to petitioner was suspended and allotted to 2 private respondent and the entire proceeding of Revenue Case No. 202509042600004/B 121/2024-25 has been initiated by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Gharghoda. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner samuh is a swa sahayata samuh which runs, controls and manages the affairs of Public distribution shop, Kurmibhauna with utmost sincerity. The fair price shop, Kurmibhauna distributes the food grain to the villagers of gram panchayat Kurmibhauna and other two dependent villages pordi and Raayi. On 19.08.2025 one complaint was made by some of the villagers alleging that the petitioner have distributed rice for 3 months to all the villagers of village Kurmibhauna and 80% of villagers of village Pordi but one month of rice grains were not distributed among the villagers of village Raayi. Thereafter the Assistant Food Officer was directed to carry out an inspection and submit a report. The Assistant Food Officer prepared a panchnama and recorded the statements of seller of the fair price shop and the sarpanch of the village. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is noteworthy to mention herein that, the petitioner filed a reply on 12.09.2025 inter alia mentioning that due to shortage to rice the distribution could not be made, however the rice has already been distributed to them for month of august on 22.08.2025 and 23.08.2025, moreover the petitioner also request to supply the documents on the basis of which the show cause notice was issued to them. Subsequently, on receiving of the reply filed by the petitioner the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Gharghoda directed the Assistant Food Officer, Gharghoda to examine and verify the reply filed by the petitioner and submit a report. That thereafter, the 3 Sub divisional Officer (Revenue) issued the Impugned order suspending the shop of the petitioner and attached the same to private respondent, Mahalaxmi Mahila Swa Sahayat samuh, Kotrimal. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that, the entire procedure adopted by the respondent authorities becomes suspicious as the Assistant Food Officer has not examined and verified the reply filed by the petitioner. The report submitted by the Assistant Food Officer clearly shows that it was prepared at belated stage, after the Impugned order was passed and it is abundantly clear that the Impugned order was a premeditated, because of the reason that no such report was submitted by the Assistant Food Officer on 12.09.2025 on the basis of which action has been initiated. Moreover the petitioner was not supplied with any of the document on the basis of which the action was taken against them and the petitioner samuh has been deprived of their right to be heard and the principle of natural justice has not been followed. Hence, the petition. 5. Learned counsel for respondents opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. On perusal of the records, it transpires the fact that on 29.08.2025, a show cause notice was issued by the SDO (R ), Gharghoda. Thereafter the petitioner submitted the reply to the show-cause notice on 12.09.2025 and the impugned order was also issued by the SDO (R ) Gharghoda on 12.09.2025. However, on 15.09.2025, a report was submitted by the Assistant Food Officer at a belated stage. As such the 4 order impugned dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure P/1) appears to be passed without assigning any reason, the same cannot be sustained and accordingly it is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the concerned authorities and the concerned authorities shall pass a fresh order after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner at the earliest within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 8. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti