1 2026:CGHC:22651 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2195 of 2026 Khaadya Suraksha Poshan And Upbhokta Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit - Kotchhal Through President Dhani Ram Bada S/o Gopal Ram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Kotchhal, P.S And Tahsil- Tahsil- Sitapur, Distt- Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Supply Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur Distt- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector (Food Department) Ambikapur Distt- Surguja (C.G.) 3 - The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue)- Sitapur Distt- Surguja (C.G.) 4 - The Food Inspector- Mainpat Distt- Surguja (C.G.) 5 - President Of Bhagwati Women Self Help Group- Kotchhal/operator Of Govt. Faire Price Shop Of Village- Kotchhal, P.S And Tahsil- P.S And Tahsil- Tahsil- Sitapur, Distt- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. Advocate General Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 13.05.2026 1 By filing the present petition, the petitioner assails the legality, validity and propriety of the impugned order dated 09.10.2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.3, whereby the fair price shop allotted to the petitioner has been cancelled without conducting any enquiry, without affording an opportunity of YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.05.14 10:18:01 +0530 2 hearing and in violation of the mandatory provisions contained in Rule 16(3) of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside of the impugned order dated 9.10.2024 ANNEXURE P/1 issued by the respondent no.3. 10.2 Any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is assailing the impugned order dated 09.10.2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.3, whereby the allotment of the fair price shop of the petitioner has been cancelled in a wholly arbitrary and illegal manner. It is submitted that the impugned order is a non-speaking order, passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without conducting any enquiry with regard to the allegations levelled against the petitioner, thereby being in gross violation of the principles of natural justice as well as Rule 16(3) of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. 3 Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner was duly operating the Government Fair Price Shop at Village Kotchhal and there had never been any complaint against the functioning of the 3 petitioner. On the basis of an inspection report submitted by respondent No.4 alleging shortage of essential commodities as reflected in the online server, respondent No.3 issued a show- cause notice dated 05.08.2024 to the petitioner. However, the copy of the inspection report was never supplied to the petitioner. 4 It is further submitted that pursuant to the aforesaid notice, the petitioner submitted a detailed reply along with all relevant documents denying the allegations levelled against him. However, without considering the reply submitted by the petitioner, without conducting any enquiry and without granting any effective opportunity of hearing as mandated under Rule 16(3) of the Control Order, 2016, respondent No.3 proceeded to cancel the allotment of the petitioner’s fair price shop and on the very same day allotted the shop to respondent No.5, which action is ex facie illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law. 5 Learned counsel for the petitioner lastly submits that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the orders passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.763/2026 decided on 20.02.2026, W.P.(C) No.3099/2023 decided on 11.07.2023 and also in the case of Mamta Devi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others passed in W.P.(C) No.1903/2020 decided on 20.01.2021. Hence, the impugned order deserves to be set aside. 6 On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and submits that the 4 impugned order has been passed after due consideration of the material available on record and upon finding irregularities in distribution of essential commodities in the petitioner’s fair price shop. It is further submitted that the petitioner was duly issued a show-cause notice and adequate opportunity was afforded to submit his reply; therefore, no illegality or violation of principles of natural justice has been committed by the authorities while passing the impugned order. 7 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8 Upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the grievance of the petitioner arises out of cancellation of the allotment of the petitioner’s fair price shop vide impugned order dated 09.10.2024 passed by respondent No.3. It is not in dispute that under Clause/Section 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, an efficacious statutory remedy of appeal is available against the said order. This Court is of the considered opinion that when a statutory alternative remedy is available, the petitioner ought to avail the same, more particularly when the matter involves disputed questions of fact relating to alleged shortage of essential commodities and compliance of procedural requirements under Rule 16(3) of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. 5 9 Accordingly, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the competent appellate authority under Section 18 of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 within a period of 10 days from today. In the event such appeal is preferred within the aforesaid period, the appellate authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of 30 days thereafter, strictly in accordance with law. The appellate authority shall also consider all grounds raised by the petitioner, including the plea regarding violation of principles of natural justice, non-supply of inspection report and non-compliance of Rule 16(3) of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016. 10 It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 11 With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh