J UDGMENT : ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J. 1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner- Omm Baba Sanideb WSHG praying for quashing the Office Order dated 03.01.2026 under Annexure-9 issued by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4) relating to the exclusion of the name of the petitioner-WSHG from the Annexure-8 as a society/agency for the procurement of paddy of Kharif Marketing Season 2025-26 and to declare the action of the Opp. Parties relating to the exclusion of the name of the petitioner for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 as arbitrary and illegal and issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Opp. Parties to allow the petitioner-WSHG to procure Paddy for KMS 2025-2026 in accordance with the notified policy along with other reliefs, to which, the petitioner-WSHG is entitled for. 2. The case of the petitioner-WSHG is that, as per the decision of the District Level Paddy Procurement Committee (DLPC) for KMS 2025-26, the petitioner-WSHG was selected as a paddy procurement society/agency of Basudevpur Block reflecting the name of the petitioner-WSHG as such, in Serial No.28 OF Annexure-4 indicating its PAC Code No.S2040801. Thereafter, as per Office Order dated 11.12.2025 and 18.12.2025 issued by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4), a training programme was conducted and in such training programme, the members of the petitioner-WSHG successfully completed their training and demonstrated their preparedness to procure paddy in compliances with the policy frameworks as per Annexure-5 series. Thereafter, on dated 15.12.2025, the authorities distributed paddy procurement equipments to all the selected WSHGs including the petitioner-WSHG, to which, the petitioner-WSHG received with proper acknowledgments. The above conduct of the Opp. Parties is clearly clarifying that, petitioner-WSHG was fully equipped in its all respect for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26. Nodal Officer was also duly appointed for the smooth progress of the paddy procurement system by the petitioner-WSHG and the final list of eligible Women Self Help Groups including the petitioner- WSHG for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 was prepared on dated 02.01.2026 as per Annexure-8, in which, the name of the petitioner-WSHG was in Sl. No.3, but on its next day, i.e. on 03.01.2026, suddenly, the same Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. No.3, but on its next day, i.e. on 03.01.2026, suddenly, the same Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4) unilaterally and illegally issued the impugned Office Order vide Annexure-9 excluding the name of the petitioner-WSHG as an agency for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 behind the back of the petitioner without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner-WSHG for the exclusion its name from the paddy procurement system for KMS 2025-26 and illegally tagged to the registered farmers of the petitioner with Opp. Party No.6-WSHG for the paddy procurement for KMS 2025-26. For which, without, getting any way, the petitioner filed this writ petition against the Opp. Parties praying for quashing the impugned Letter/Order dated 03.01.2026 vide Annexure-9 issued/passed by the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4) relating to the exclusion of the name of the petitioner-WSHG as an agency for the procurement of paddy for Kharif Marketing Season 2025-26 and to declare the action of the Opp. Parties as arbitrary and illegal and to issue a Writ of Mandamus against the Opp. Parties directing the Opp. Parties to allow the petitioner-WSHG to procure the paddy for KMS 2025-2026 in accordance with the notified policy. 3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the Opp. Party No.6. 4. The undisputed documents relied by the petitioner vide Annexures-1 to 8 are going to show that, the petitioner was selected as a paddy procurement society /agency for KMS 2025-26 of Basudevpur Block in the District of Bhadrak and its PACS Code No. was S2040801 and accordingly, as per the Order of the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4), the members of the petitioner-WSHG successfully completed the training programmes for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 and the equipments for paddy procurement were issued by the authorities to the petitioner-WSHG. In the final list prepared by the Opp. Parties dated 02.01.2026 vide Annexure-8, the name of the petitioner was reflected by the Opp. Parties in Sl. No.3 as a paddy procurement society/agency of Basudevpur Block for KMS 2025-26, but as per Letter No.69 dated 03.01.2026 (Annexure-9), the Opp. Party No.4 eliminated/excluded the name of the petitioner- WSHG from the paddy procurement system of KMS-2025-26 tagging the registered farmers of the petitioner-WSHG with the Opp. Parties in Sl. No.3 as a paddy procurement society/agency of Basudevpur Block for KMS 2025-26, but as per Letter No.69 dated 03.01.2026 (Annexure-9), the Opp. Party No.4 eliminated/excluded the name of the petitioner- WSHG from the paddy procurement system of KMS-2025-26 tagging the registered farmers of the petitioner-WSHG with the Opp. Party No.6-WSHG for the procurement of paddy in place of the petitioner under the following grounds i.e. “(i). No specific office room and space is not suitable for loading & unloading of paddy. (ii). Boundary wall, Pindi & Godown facility is not available. (iii). Reply of the show cause submitted by the WSHG is not satisfactory. & the registered farmers of the WSHG will be tagged to Sureswarpur PACS, Basudevpur Municipality (Opp. Party No.6).” 5. The undisputed documents relied upon by the petitioner- WSHG including the final list of selection as the paddy procurement society/agency for KMS-2025-26 of Basudevpur Block vide Annexure-8 prepared on dated 02.01.2026 is going to show that, the petitioner was selected by the Opp. Parties as the society/agency for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 of Basudevpur Block, but, on its next day, as per letter No. 69 dated 03.01.2026 vide Annexure-9, the Collector, Bhadrak (Opp. Party No.4) eliminated/excluded the name of the petitioner-WSHG from such list and tagged the registered farmers of the petitioner-WSHG with Sureswarpur PAC (Opp. Party No.6) on the grounds as indicated above in Para No.4 of this Judgment. 6. When the petitioner was selected by the Opp. Parties as a paddy procurement society/agency for the KMS 2025-26 and when trainings were provided to the members of the petitioner-WSHG by the Opp. Parties for the same and when the equipments were supplied by the Opp. Parties to the petitioner-WSHG for such procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 and when in the final list of the selected WSHGs as paddy procurement societies/agencies for KMS 2025-26 was prepared indicating/reflecting the name of the petitioner in the Serial No.3 of Letter No.19 dated 02.01.2026 vide Annexure-8, then, on the basis of the said undisputed documents vide Annexures 1 to 8, certain rights were created in favour of the petitioner-WSHG as a selected paddy procurement society/agency for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 and when on its next day of Annexure-8, as per the impugned Office Letter No.69 dated 03.01.2026 vide Annexure-9, the Opp. Party No.4 eliminated/excluded the name of the petitioner from such list and tagged all the registered farmers of the petitioner with the Opp. Party No.6, then, at this juncture, as per law, before elimination/exclusion of the name of the petitioner-WSHG from Annexure-8 as per Annexure-9, an opportunity of being heard should have been given by the Opp. Party No.4 to the petitioner to have its say before the Opp. Party No.4 explaining/objecting the above grounds of its elimination but, the Opp. Party No.4 has not done so. Because, the Annexure- 9 does not reveal about providing any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner-WSHG about the same as well as the causes and reasons for discarding the so-called show-cause, if any of the petitioner-WSHG. 7. It is the specific/definite case of the petitioner-WSHG as well as the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner-WSHG that, any show-cause was not given to the petitioner by the Opp. Party No.4 stating/indicating the above so-called grounds for elimination of the name of the petitioner-WSHG and any opportunity of being heard was not given to the petitioner for the elimination of the name of the petitioner from Annexure-8 as per Annexure-9. 8. It is the settled propositions of law that, if an any show cause notice issued and if any, reply is submitted on the basis of such show-cause, then, it shall be the duty of the authority to consider that reply and then, to take decision on the same. The “consideration” of show-cause means “active consideration”, without which, it cannot be said that, the principle of natural justice has been followed. The authority also bound to pass a reasoned order only after considering the contents of the reply to the show-cause and not whimsically stating that, the reply furnished against the show-cause was not found to be satisfactory. It is also very fundamental in law that, merely by issuance of notice to show-cause without providing reasonable time to file reply, the same would not amount to non- compliance of the principles of natural justice. Because, purpose of issuance of show-cause notice is to provide reasonable time for the submission of reply, in absence of which, the same would amount to non-compliance of the principles of natural justice. Because, purpose of issuance of show-cause notice is to provide reasonable time for the submission of reply, in absence of which, the same would amount to non-compliance of the principles of natural justice. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decisions: I. In a case between Nilamani Jal Vs. Collector, Bolangir and Ors. reported in 2016 (II) OLR 190 that, although show cause notice has been issued and the petitioner has given his reply, but merely issuance of show-cause is not sufficient to say that, the principles of natural justice has been followed, rather, when an employee in whose against show cause notice is being issued and submit reply, it is the duty of the authority to consider that and thereafter, to take decision. Consideration means active consideration. Order cannot be held to be sustainable and the same is quashed. II. In a case between (M/s) East Coast Constructions Industries Ltd., Odisha vs. State of Odisha & Others reported in 2016 (II) CLR 359 that, merely completing the formality of giving notice is not sufficient for complying with the principles of natural justice, as once after the notice is issued and a detailed reply is given by the party, the authority is duty bound to pass a reasoned order only after considering the contents of the reply, and not by whimsically stating that, the reply furnished was not found to be satisfactory. (Para No.7) 9. When the impugned Office Letter No.69 dated 03.01.2026 vide Annexure-9 issued by the Opp. Party No.4, for the elimination/exclusion of the name of the petitioner- WSHG as a paddy procurement society/agency for KMS 2025- 26 from Annexure-8 after creation of certain rights in favour of the petitioner as per Annexures-1 to 8 is not going to show that, which show-cause was issued by the Opp. Party No.4 to the petitioner and what was the reply of the petitioner against the same and when the petitioner has stated that, in this writ petition supported with an affidavit that, no show-cause was issued to the petitioner by the Opp. Party No.4 and when the Opp. Party No.4 to the petitioner and what was the reply of the petitioner against the same and when the petitioner has stated that, in this writ petition supported with an affidavit that, no show-cause was issued to the petitioner by the Opp. Party No.4 and when the Opp. Parties neither filed, nor relied upon any impugned so- called show-cause as well as the impugned reply to the same given by the petitioner-WSHG, then, at this juncture, it is held that, the impugned Letter/Order dated 03.01.2026 vide Annexure-9 has been issued/passed by the Opp. Party No.4 eliminating/excluding the name of the petitioner as a paddy procurement society/agency for KMS 2025-26 from Annexure- 8 is not legally sustainable under law on the ground of non-compliance of the principles of natural justice. 10. For which, there is justification under law to consider the grounds of elimination/exclusion of the name of the petitioner indicated in Annexure-9 afresh by the Opp. Party No.4 (Collector, Bhadrak) after proper compliance of the principles of natural justice and after giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, but till final decision of the Opp. Party No.4 in that matter, the responsibility/assignment given to the Opp. Party No.6 tagging the registered farmers of the petitioner-WSHG with the Opp. Party No.6 for the procurement of paddy for KMS 2025-26 should not be disturbed/interfered only for the reason that, the disturbance/interference in favour of the Opp. Party No.6 shall ultimately affect the farmers’ interest in selling the paddy. But, if after fresh hearing, if it will be found that, the allegations alleged against the petitioner-WSHG for the elimination of its name are false, then, the petitioner-WSHG can be entitled for proper compensation for unnecessary harassments. 11. As such, there is some merit in the writ petition filed by the petitioner-WSHG. The same is to be allowed. 12. In result, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. 13. The impugned Letter/Order No.69 dated 03.01.2026 vide Annexure-9 issued/passed by the Opp. Party No.4(Collector, Bhadrak) relating to the elimination/exclusion of the name of the petitioner-WSHG as a paddy procurement society/agency of Basudevpur Block for KMS 2025-26 is quashed except the tagging up of the registered farmers of the petitioner-WSHG with the Opp. Party No.6-WSHG. 14. The Opp. 13. The impugned Letter/Order No.69 dated 03.01.2026 vide Annexure-9 issued/passed by the Opp. Party No.4(Collector, Bhadrak) relating to the elimination/exclusion of the name of the petitioner-WSHG as a paddy procurement society/agency of Basudevpur Block for KMS 2025-26 is quashed except the tagging up of the registered farmers of the petitioner-WSHG with the Opp. Party No.6-WSHG. 14. The Opp. Party No.4 (Collector, Bhadrak) is directed to consider the matter relating to the elimination/exclusion of the name of the petitioner as a paddy procurement society/agency of Basudevpur Block for KMS 2025-26 afresh and to take fresh decision on the same after issuance of show- cause notice to the petitioner-WSHG providing the petitioner- WSHG an opportunity for filing of its reply against the show- cause as well as after giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner-WSHG and others, if any, in full compliance with the principles of natural justice clarifying that, the tagging up of the registered farmers of the petitioner-WSHG with the Opp. Party No.6-WSHG for the procurement of the paddy for KMS 2025-26 indicated in Annexure-9 is remained undisturbed/unaltered. It is made clear here that, if in the fresh decision of the Opp. Party No.4 (Collector, Bhadrak), it is found that, the alleged grounds for elimination/exclusion of the name of the petitioner-WSHG indicated in Para No.4 of this Judgment are false, then, the petitioner-WSHG is at liberty to claim compensation for unnecessary harassments on the basis of the alleged false allegations against the erring persons/officials those had alleged such false allegations. 15. As such, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of finally.