1 2026:CGHC:23196-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2509 of 2026 1 - Ankit Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh Through President Uma Kesharwani, Office At Rapta Chowk Sanichari Bazar, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare and Medical Education, Sawasthya Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Health Services, Sawasthya Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Commissioner, Bilaspur Region/Chairman, Jeevandeep Committee, State Mental Housing, Sendri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Hospital Superintendent State Mental Hospital, Sendri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - R.M.O./Food Incharge Officer State Mental Hospital, Sendri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Smt. Reshma Begam, Treasurer, R/o Kududand, Vishnu Nagar, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 7 - Unnati Swa Sahayata Samuh Through its Actual President Smt. Digitally signed by MOHAMMED AADIL KHAN Date: 2026.05.18 15:46:51 +0530 2 Rabiya Khatun, Office At- Kududand, Vishnu Nagar, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Ms. Anju Ahuja, Advocate. For State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 15-05-2026 1. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents to place all the records of the case for kind perusal of the Hon'ble Court. 10.2 That the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, certiorari quashing and set aside the Impugned Order dated 02.04.2026 (vide ्ቅमांक / भोजन /निननिदा/2026/790) issued by Respondent No. 4 (Annexure P-1) 10.3 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to reinstate the Petitioner's rights under the agreement dated 30.04.2025 and work order dated 02.05.2025, permitting the Petitioner to complete the remaining part of his tenure for providing foor services as per tender terms. 3 10.4 That the Hon'ble court may kindly be Quash and set aside any subsequent work order, tender, or ad-hoc arrangement made by the Respondents in favor of the complainant (Reshma Begam /Unnati Swa Sahayata Samuh) or any other third party for the said work during the pendency of the Petitioner's legitimate tenure. 10.5 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to initiate a fresh transparent process of retendering for food supply work in between Petitioner be allowed to continue / resume his earlier work in the interest of justice. 10.6 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to Direct an independent enquiry against the complainant for submitting a forged and fabricated complaint, and direct the authorities to initiate blacklisting proceedings against the complainant's group as per Clause 11 of the Tender terms. 10.7 That, such other reliefs as the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be granted to the Petitioner in the interest of justice.” 2. The facts, in brief, as mentioned in the petition, are that on 08.04.2025, Respondent No. 4, Hospital Superintendent of State Mental Hospital, Sendri, Bilaspur, issued a tender exclusively for Women Self- Help Groups to provide meals to indoor patients for 2024-25. The 4 Petitioner participated and was declared the lowest bidder (L-1) at Rs. 142/-. A formal agreement was executed on 30.04.2025 for a 12-month period with a clause allowing cancellation only with one month’s notice. Subsequently, a Work Order dated 02.05.2025 authorized the Petitioner to start providing meals from 03.05.2025, which the Petitioner carried out diligently. It is contended that despite proper performance, a frivolous complaint was filed on 28.11.2025 by Smt. Reshma Begam, falsely claiming to be President of a competing group and alleging technical irregularities to cancel the contract. As per the Petitioner, RTI- obtained documents demonstrate that the complainant had misrepresented her position. It is case of the Petitioner that ignoring these facts, Respondent No. 4 issued a Show Cause Notice on 19.12.2025 and later, on 02.04.2026, passed an impugned order arbitrarily cancelling the Petitioner's contract and demanding vacation of the hospital kitchen within three days. The Petitioner continuously contested these actions, submitted representations and replies, and provided statutory and experience documents demonstrating longstanding, lawful operation and prior excellent service. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the impugned Order dated 02.04.2026 is arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, as it cancels a validly awarded contract on misconstrued technical grounds, ignoring that the Petitioner society has been continuously functioning since 2014. The Respondents blatantly violated Clause 5 of the notarized agreement and Clause 18 of the tender document, which mandate a minimum 30- 5 day notice prior to termination or vacation of premises, yet the Petitioner was given only three days. The entire action was triggered by a forged complaint from Reshma Begam, who falsely claimed to be the President of a competing society, whereas official RTI records confirm she is merely the Treasurer. It is a settled principle that any action based on fraud is void ab initio. Furthermore, the Respondents ignored the Petitioner's detailed replies and statutory documents establishing valid PAN, GST, FSSAI, and experience credentials, including their own certificate recognizing the Petitioner's service since 2019. The malafide intent of the authorities is evident, as immediately after unlawfully terminating the contract, the same work was allotted to the fraudster who filed the fake complaint. This demonstrates a deliberate abuse of power aimed at ousting the Petitioner and conferring illegal benefits on the very person who orchestrated the fraudulent allegations, rendering the Impugned Order wholly illegal and unsustainable in law. She would further submit that on the same day when the Petitioner's contract was cancelled, respondent No.7 was granted the same contract for a further period of 12 months. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that period of contract of the Petitioner is over. He would further submit that the impugned order has been passed after submission of reply by the Petitioner and due enquiry. Further, there is discrepancy in the certificates submitted by the Petitioner with regard to year of registration of the Petitioner society. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the 6 material annexed with the petition. 6. From the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that the show cause notice has been issued to the Petitioner with respect to the queries raised by the respondents for terminating the Petitioner's contract which was for 12 months and a month was left and because of the discrepancies which has been pointed out in the show cause notice, the Petitioner's contract was cancelled by the impugned order dated 02.04.2026 and on the same day it was given the respondent No.7 for a period of 12 months without inviting tender. 7. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 02.04.2026 is liable to be and is hereby quashed and respondent No.4 is directed to reconsider the reply submitted by the Petitioner (Annexure-P/8) which has been annexed at page No.36 of the petition and pass fresh order in accordance with law within a period of one week. Till then, respondent No.7 shall continue. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed to the extend indicated hereinabove. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Aadil