1 2026:CGHC:22852 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3305 of 2022 Pushpa Suman Mahila Swa Sahayta Samuh at Village Changeri Tahsil Marwahi, District - Gaurela - Pendra - Marwahi (C.G.), Through Its President Suman Devi, Daughter Of Dashrath Yadav Wife of Basant Lal, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Village Changeri, Tahsil Marwahi, District - Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Food Nagrik Aapurty and Upbhokta Sanrakshan, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, District : Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi, Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Marwahi District - Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi, (C.G.) 4 - President Of Durgavati Mahila Swa-Sahayata Samuh Karhani, Block And Tahsil Marwahi, District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) SHYNA AJAY Digitally signed by SHYNA AJAY Date: 2026.05.16 16:42:37 +0530 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jogi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 14/05/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs : 10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 21.03.2022 (Annexure A-1) passed by the respondent no. 1 and also may be set- aside the contrary order dated 05.06.2021 (Annexure A-3) passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Rev) Marwahi, in the interest of justice. 10.2 Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Petitioner’s Society operates a Fair Price Shop at Gram Panchayat Changeri, Tahsil Marwahi, District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (CG). Due to administrative exigencies, the President convened a meeting on 18.4.2020, wherein the then Secretary Smt. Bela Bai and certain other members were removed from their positions. Subsequently, Smt. Fulbai was appointed as the Secretary in place of Smt Bela Bai and several others were inducted as new members. Information regarding these changes were communicated to the Sub- 3 Divisional (Revenue), Marwahi, the Tahsildar, Marwahi and the Food Inspector, Marwahi. Thereafter, on 20.12.2020, the ex- Secretary Smt. Bela Bai and the removed members filed a false complaint before the concerned SDO. Based on the said complaint, the SDO suspended the Petitioner-Society. Aggrieved by the said action, the petitioner filed WPC No.1406/2021 before this Court. This Court vide order dated 9.3.2021, directed the concerned authority to decide the petitioner’s case within a period of three months. Notwithstanding the directions, the concerned SDO rejected the petitioner’s allotment of the Fair Price Shop vide order dated 5.6.2021 and temporarily allotted the shop to the Respondent No.4-Society. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the concerned Collector under Section 16 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 against the SDO’s order. The Collector rejected the appeal, against which, the petitioner filed WPC No.3411/2021. This Court vide order dated 23.8.2021 dipsosed of the aforesaid writ petition, as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of filing appeal before the State Government within a period of 30 days. In compliance of the order dated 23.8.2021, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Secretary, Food an Nagrik Aapurty Department, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur. The learned Secretary (Respondent No.1) passed a contrary order dated 21.3.2022 confirming the order passed by Respondent No.2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 21.3.2022 passed by Respondent No.1, the petitioner has preferred this petition. 4 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a false complaint has been made against the petitioner before the concerned SDO. The impugned order(s) is stigmatic in nature and has been passed without affording a proper opportunity of hearing. He lastly prays to allow the petition. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that after a due enquiry, certain deficiencies were revealed in the operation of the shop. Further, it came to the notice that the petitioner was not distributing the essential commodities properly. The online entries were made for rice distribution, but the actual stock was not delivered to the beneficiaries. He submits that the quantity of rice was also more than the prescribed quantity. Hence, the subject enquiry was initiated by the Food Inspector. He submits that a show cause notice was also issued to the petitioner but a satisfactory reply was not submitted by the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering the fact that the concerned SDO, the Collector and the Secretary have passed concurrent and well-reasoned orders against the petitioner, this Court does not find any ground for interference in the same. 7. Moreover, interference in such administrative or quasi-judicial orders is warranted only upon a clear demonstration of a glaring illegality or jurisdictional error. In the present case, the petitioner has failed to point any procedural impropriety or violation of the 5 principles of natural justice that would necessitate intervention of this Court. The findings regarding the irregularities in the distribution of essential commodities and mismatch in online entries are findings of fact that have been upheld at three successive levels of scrutiny. 8. Resultantly, the Petition being devoid of merits is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Shyna Ajay