1 2026:CGHC:26011 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3068 of 2026 1 - Vinod Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Shersingh Yadav, Aged About 39 Years At Present Samiti Manager Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Amadhula R. N. No. 239, And Add. - Village Bhaisbod Post Bhaisbod, Tehsil Dondi, Dist. Balod (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co- Operative, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Managing Directar Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex C B D Sector 21 Atal Nagar District Raipur, C G 492002. 4 - The Collector Dist. Balod (C.G.). 5 - The Distirct Marketing Officer Dist. Balod (C.G.). 6 - The Chief Executive Officer, Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit Durg District Durg (C.G.) 7 - The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society Dist. Balod (C.G.) 8 - The District Food Officer Dist. Balod (C.G.). ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 For Petitioner(s) :- Mr. Shivam Mishra, Advocate For State :- Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, P.L. For Resondent No. 3 :- Mr. Yogendra Pandey, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 25.06.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records pertaining to impugned action of the respondents for the kind perusal of the Hon'ble Court. 10.2. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to give also the protection of shortage due to dryness as earlier provided as well as same to be protection granted to the millers as in the order dated 15/05/2024 (P/5). 10.3. That, the Hon'ble court may kindly set- aside the direction issued by Deputy Commissioner Cooperative and Deputy Registrar (cooperative societies), District Balod (C.G). 10.4 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to provide excess amount which has been invest to protect the paddy after 31st March to till date and zero shortage incentive (Protsahan) Amount. 10.5 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to 7 to stop harass the petitioner by making pressure 3 through police to fill Zero shortage from own- cost. 10.6 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to 7 to make an enquiry and about the shortage is due to dry and find the liable person for punishment. 10.7 Any other relief which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit, in the interest of justice.” 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition stands squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in WPC No. 2440 of 2025 (Ahsish Rajak vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other bunch of petitions decided on 09.05.2025. He prays that the present writ petition may also be disposed of in terms of the observations and findings recorded therein. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are reproduced below:– “7. The core grievance of the petitioner is that he is being held personally llable for weight loss due to natural moisture evaporation in the paddy which was not lifted in time by the Marketing Federation, despite repeated efforts by the petitioner and communications. The Court finds that no prior inquiry was conducted to assess the actual shortfall attributable to the petitioner, if any. The terms of the contract, particularly Clause 5.6 and Clause 13, clearly lay down the procedure for recovery and 4 dispute resolution. Clause 5.6 of the Agreement reads as under :- "5.6- विपणन संघ द्वा रा प्रदा य की गई रा शि सं उप र्जन की न्द्र (संमिवि) द्वा रा धा न विपणन संघ की की प्र प् होन परा ष रा शि की सं#ली% संमिवि की प्रदा य की%न ए अन्य अन(सं विगकी दा) सं रा शि की कीटौ+% की र्ज ग%। इसंकी उपरा  भी% सं#ली% यग्य रा शि ष राहोन परा जिर्जली विपणन अमिधाकी रा% द्वा रा छ. ग. रा ज्य संहोकी रा% संसं यटौ3 अमिधाविनय 1960 की अग सं#ली% की य हो% हो( संक्ष न्य य लीय 5 प्रकीराण दार्ज विकीय र्ज ग ।" 8. Clause 13 of the Agreement provides for arbitration of the dispute between the parties, reads as under :- "13- आर्बि89ट्रेन :- इसं अन(8धा की विकीसं% भी% कीण्डि<=की सं सं8मिधा वि दा उत्पन्न होन की ण्डि@वि 5 वि दा की विनणय हो( जिर्जली 5 जिर्जली कीलीक्टौरा की विनणय अन्तिन् होग र्ज उभीयपक्ष) की न्य होग । कीलीक्टौरा द्वा रा दिदाय गय विनणय की अप%ली उभीयपक्ष) द्वा रा जिर्जली की संभी ग%य आय(क् की की र्ज संकी ग% । 9. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the relevant clauses of the agreement, and past practices followed by the State Government as reflected in its communications, this Court is of the opinion that coercive recovery action without first determining the liability through appropriate inquiry and invoking the agreed dispute resolution mechanism, is arbitrary and not sustainable. 5 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to submit a detailed representation before the District Collector in terms of Clause 13 of the agreement within three weeks from today. The concerned District Collector shall consider the representation of the petitioner, afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and pass a speaking order in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date of receipt of representation. Till such decision is taken by the concerned Collector, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned letter dated 03.04.2025. It shall also be open to the Collector to consider the applicability of the Government's own circulars and policy letters recognizing natural moisture loss in previous years for reimbursement. 11. The petitioner is directed to cooperate in any inquiry conducted by the respondent authorities regarding the alleged shortage or loss. 12. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.” 3. Learned State counsel submits that he has no objection to the aforesaid prayer. 4. Since the grievance of the petitioner is identical to the one considered in WPC No. 2440 of 2025 (Ahsish Rajak vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other bunch of petitions decided on 6 09.05.2025 and the petitioner in the present case is also seeking the same relief, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of and in line with the aforesaid order. 5. No order as to cost(s). sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha