1 2026:CGHC:21214 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1911 of 2026 1 - Prathmik Krishi Saakh Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Charouda Registration No. 1142, A Society Registered Under The Chhattisgarh Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960 And Having Its Registered Address At Charouda, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh Through Its Manager Shri Heman Lal Sahu, S/o Johan Sahu, Age 59 Years, R/o House No. 36, Ward 02, Charouda, Fingeshwar, Gariyabandh, Pin 493992 Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Cooperation, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur C.G. 2 - Joint Commissioner Cooperative, Raipur Division, Chhattisgarh, Opp. Lal Ganga Shopping Mall, G.E. Road, C.G. Email- Jrcsraipur1@Gmail.Com 3 - Assistant Commissioner Cooperative And Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, District -Gariyaband, Gaurav Path Road, C.G. Email- Arcsgariaband2@Gmail.Com 4 - Collector District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh District Collectorate Office Gariyaband, C.G. 493889 Email- Gariaband.Cg@Gov.In ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from CIS System) Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Mallick Sudip Ravi, Advocate For State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 06/05/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking following relief(s):- “A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned letter dated 02.04.2026 issued by Respondent Authority; B) Stay the operation and effect of the impugned letter dated 02.04.2026 during pendency of the present petition; C) Grant any other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 2. Brief facts of the case, as projected in the petition, are that the petitioner is a registered Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society engaged in procurement of paddy under the State procurement scheme at the Minimum Support Price (MSP). The present dispute arises out of procurement of Kharif crop paddy for the year 2024–2025, wherein, due to accumulation of surplus stock at procurement centres beyond prescribed limits and delay in lifting 3 of such stock, alleged dryage losses have been attributed to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that such delay in lifting of paddy was solely attributable to the inaction and failure on the part of the respondent authorities to act upon instructions for priority lifting, and not due to any negligence or omission on the part of the petitioner. It is further pleaded that earlier the petitioner had approached this Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 3615/2025, wherein vide order dated 14.07.2025, this Court directed the petitioner to submit a representation before the competent authorities, and in turn, directed the authorities to consider and decide the same within a period of 90 days. In compliance thereof, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 31.07.2025 before the Collector; however, no action was taken and no decision was communicated. Thereafter, during the Legislative Assembly Budget Session (February–March 2026), certain discussions took place regarding shortage of paddy, and subsequently, without considering the petitioner’s representation, the respondent authorities issued the impugned letter dated 02.04.2026 directing initiation of recovery proceedings under Section 58(b) of the Chhattisgarh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Being aggrieved by the said action, the petitioner has approached this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned letter dated 02.04.2026 is wholly arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction, as the same has been issued mechanically without 4 any independent application of mind and merely on the basis of legislative discussions, which have no binding or adjudicatory value in law. It is contended that no show-cause notice or opportunity of hearing has been afforded to the petitioner prior to initiation of recovery proceedings, thereby rendering the impugned action violative of the principles of natural justice. It is further submitted that Section 58(b) of the Chhattisgarh Co- operative Societies Act, 1960 mandates that liability for loss must be preceded by a proper audit, inquiry, inspection, or other fact- finding exercise establishing negligence, misconduct, or misappropriation. However, in the present case, no such statutory exercise has been undertaken. Learned counsel further submits that in absence of foundational jurisdictional facts, assumption of jurisdiction under Section 58(b) is ex facie illegal and unsustainable. It is also contended that despite a specific direction issued by this Court in earlier writ petition, the petitioner’s representation dated 31.07.2025 has not been considered till date, and without deciding the same, the respondents have hastily initiated coercive proceedings. It is thus prayed that the impugned letter initiating recovery proceedings be quashed and appropriate relief be granted to the petitioner. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and supports the impugned action. It is submitted that the impugned communication merely directs initiation of proceedings under 5 Section 58(b) of the Act of 1960 and does not by itself determine any liability against the petitioner. It is contended that the competent authority is yet to undertake the necessary inquiry and assess the alleged loss, and therefore, at this stage, no adverse order has been passed against the petitioner. Learned State counsel further submits that the petitioner will have adequate opportunity to put forth its defence during the course of such proceedings. It is thus argued that the writ petition is premature and does not warrant interference by this Court at this stage. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. From the pleadings and reliefs sought by the petitioner, it appears that the challenge in the present petition is directed against the letter dated 02.04.2026 whereby the competent authority has merely directed initiation of proceedings under Section 58(b) of the Chhattisgarh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. 7. A perusal of the impugned communication indicates that the same is only an enabling step authorizing initiation of proceedings and undertaking of an exercise for assessment of alleged deficiency or loss, and no final determination of liability has yet been made against the petitioner. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present writ petition has been filed at a premature stage, inasmuch as no cause of action has accrued to the petitioner warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, it is observed that the petitioner 6 had earlier submitted a representation dated 31.07.2025 pursuant to the order passed by this Court, which is stated to be pending consideration. Therefore, it would be appropriate to direct the competent authority to consider and decide the said representation, if not already decided, in accordance with law within a reasonable time. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the competent authority shall consider and decide the petitioner’s pending representation expeditiously, preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. It is further observed that the petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all available grounds before the competent authority in the proceedings initiated under Section 58(b) of the Act of 1960. 10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Shayna Judge