1 CGHC010236552021 2026:CGHC:31333 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3757 of 2021 1 - Prathmik Krishi Sakh Sahkari Samiti Kurchundi Registered No. 856 Through Yogendra Sao, Son of Shri Sukhanandan Sao, Aged 32 years, R/o Kurchundi, Basna, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh- 493554 2 - Prathmik Krishi Sakh Sahkari Samiti Bade Temri, Registered No. 884 Through Padman Sao, Son of Shri Hariram Sao, Aged 27 Years Bade Temri Basna, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh- 493554, Chhattisgarh 3 - Prathmik Krishi Sakh Sahkari Samiti Bade Dhabha, Registered No. 1349 Through Anand Das, Son of Shri Sonu Das, Aged 44 Years, Bade Dhabha, Basna, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh- 493554 4 - Gramin Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Garh Fulzhar, Registered No. 1350 Through Kshamanidhi Sao, Son of Shri Sahdev Sao Aged 51 Years Garh Fulzar, Basna, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh- 493554 5 - Prathmik Krishi Sakh Sahkari Samiti Dhumabhatha, Registered No. 865 Through Gayaram Nayak , Son of Shri Subhash Nayak Aged 28 Years Dhumabhata, Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 493554. 6 - Gramin Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Bichhiya, Registered No. 1318 Through Kamlesh Bhoi, Son of Shri Sikander Bhoi, Aged 32 Years Bichhiyya, Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 493554. ... Petitioner(s) versus RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.07.27 18:14:59 +0530 2 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Cooperative Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Mahasamund District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioners : Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Preeti Yadav, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Rajkumar Sahu, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 22/07/2026 1. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition by giving directions to the respondent no. 1 for giving management charges for custody of purchased paddy which is lying in open space during summer and rainy season, the State Government be further directed to give rebate of 1% dryness due to sun heat, since purchased paddy are lying in open space and are being dried due to sun heat like millers to whom such benefit has been given by circular Annexure P/2 by marketing federation which is discriminatory, the direction to respondent no. 2 be given as was given in connected cases of WPC No. 2519//2021 dated 03.08.2021 Annexure P/4, so that petitioners may not face surcharge cases for none of their fault. 10.2. Costs of the petition be awarded and 10.3. Any other relief or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deems fit, be also awarded.” 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are cooperative societies and are engaged in the paddy procurement under tri-party agreement. He contended that the petitioners societies use to purchase paddy from agriculturists at concerned paddy procurement center for MarkFed. Sometime due to non-lifting of the paddy purchased and staked in the paddy procurement center which is an open ground it suffers dryness due to lying in open sunlight. Earlier there was clause 12 under the Circular/Guidelines issued by the Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited, Raipur for allowing 1% rebate due to dryness of paddy, but that is only to the federation, however, benefit of the same is not extended to the societies like petitioners and thereby petitioners are suffering loss. 3. Learned State counsel would submit that Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation is not arrayed as party respondent and further the petitioners have not submitted any representation before the appropriate authority i.e. MarkFed, who purchases the paddy through societies like petitioners. 4. At this stage, learned senior counsel would submit that the petitioners may be permitted to submit a fresh representation before Marketing Federation i.e. MarkFed and in turn, the concerned authority be directed to consider and take decision on the representation to be submitted keeping in mind the 4 circular dated 26.10.2004 at the earliest within a specified time frame. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also peruse the material available on record. 6. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties and the nature of grievance raised in this writ petition, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of permitting the petitioners to submit representation raising all the ground as raised in this writ petition before appropriate authority/competent authority and if such a representation is submitted, the concerned authority shall consider and take decision on the same in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within further period of 3 months from the date receipt of such representation. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi