1 2026:CGHC:24502 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 754 of 2026 • Rajkumar Kaushik S/o Late Shri Rati Ram Kaushik, Aged About 57 Years R/o Main Road Basti Pamgarh Ward No. 18, Pamgarh, Tahsil- Pamgarh District Janjgir Champa C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department Of Food, Civil Applies And Consumer Protection Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2. Collector, Janjgir Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 3. Sub Divisional Officer (R) Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 4. Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation (Markfed), Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 5. Jila Sahkari Samiti Dongakohraud, Tahsil Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Atul Pandey, Advocate. For State/Respondents No.1 to 3 : Mr. Abhishek Chand Gupta, P.L. For Respondent No.4 : Ms. Astha Shukla, Advocate For Respondent No.5 : Ms. Pragya Pandey, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 17/06/2026 1. Heard. 2. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith issue procurement tokens to the petitioner and purchase his paddy at MSP for the Kharif Marketing Session 2025-26; 10.2 Extend the paddy procurement period specifically for the petitioner, or in the alternative, direct procurement through a special window; 10.3 Direct the respondents to ensure payment at MSP without penalty or deduction; 10.4 Pass any other order(s) or direction(s) deemed fit in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his paddy has not been purchased by the Paddy Procurement Centre. In this regard, petitioner has filed an application dated 30.01.2026, which is a day before the last date before the respondent authorities, but no action was taken. Subsequently, the State Government issued an order dated 03.02.2026 extending the paddy procurement dates for 05.02.2026 and 06.02.2026. Despite the extension, petitioner could not avail the procurement benefits, as the process involves token generation, scheduling, verification and delivery, which cannot practically be completed within two days. Therefore, petitioner prays for a direction issued to the respondent authorities to issue procurement tokens to him and purchase his paddy. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that after passing of the last date, State Government has extended the dates, i.e., 05.02.2026 & 06.02.2026 subject to the condition of the physical verification of the paddy of the farmers. However, petitioner himself was negligent in not following the procedure, consequently, he could not deposit his paddy and it could not be purchased by the respondent authorities. Now after expiry of the last date, fixed for purchase of the paddy, no order can be passed for purchase of the same. Hence, the instant writ petition is not maintainable. 3 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that on 30.01.2026 last date has been fixed for purchase of the paddy and thereafter, it was extended upto 05.02.2026 & 06.02.2026, under certain condition, however, the petitioner could not deposit the paddy, as such no further extension can be granted nor any order can be passed under the writ petition 226 under the jurisdiction of the Constitution. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition being devoid of merits, the same is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 7. Interlocutory application(s), pending if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Deepti Jha