1 CGHC010289312026 2026:CGHC:33090 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3991 of 2026 Smt. Manjulata Anand Wife Of Rajesh Anand, Aged About 32 Years Resident Of Chandrashekhar Ward Sarangarh, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector, Sarangarh District Sarangarh - Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh 3 - Food Officer, Office Of Collector Food Department, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh - Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh 4 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Sarangarh, District Sarangarh - Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh 5 - Tahsildar Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh - Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh ---Respondents (Cause title taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Mr. B. M. Roy, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Additional A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 31.07.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following relief:- Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL 2 10.1. That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned notice dated 30.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No. 3 and impugned execution proceeding (Annexure P-2) of Case No. 202506320300085/A- 76, in the interest of justice. 10.2. Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, without holding any enquiry as envisaged under the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, the Collector (Food Department), Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), has held that a sum of Rs. 18,01,293.99/- is recoverable from the petitioner, who was running a fair price shop at Ward No. 04, Chandrashekhar Azad Ward, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), bearing ID No. 411003009. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that unless and until the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), holds an enquiry and affords an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, such an order cannot be passed by the Collector without there being any enquiry under the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, which is required to be conducted before passing any order of recovery. He further submits that though he has filed a reply to the show cause notice issued by the Collector on 19.05.2025, in fact, 3 an enquiry regarding the deficit of food grains is required to be conducted and thereafter proceedings ought to be undertaken by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) under the Control Order, 2016, which has not been done. As such, the order dated 16.06.2025 passed by the Collector directing initiation of RRC proceedings for recovery by the concerned Tahsildar, as well as the order dated 30.04.2025 passed by the Collector are not in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the petition itself suffers from delay and laches, as the impugned orders were passed way back on 30.04.2025 and thereafter on 16.06.2025. As such, the petitioner cannot be granted any relief, as he has not agitated his grievance within a reasonable period of time. Therefore, on the ground of delay and laches, the present petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal of the documents available on record, it does not transpire that any proceedings under the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 have been conducted by the concerned authority, without commenting on the merits of the case and without expressing any opinion as to whether any order has been passed under the Control Order, 2016 or not, the petitioner is directed to file an appropriate application before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), in 4 this regard. In the event the proceedings have not been conducted in accordance with the Control Order, 2016, the Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue) is directed to initiate proceedings under the Control Order, 2016 by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner is also directed to file all relevant documents in support of his case. Since, under the Control Order, 2016, the matter is required to be decided within a period of three months, as such the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) is directed to decide the matter in accordance with law under the Control Order, 2016, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Thereafter, if any amount is found recoverable, the same shall be recovered from the persons held responsible in accordance with law. Accordingly both the order dated 30.04.2025 and the effect and operation of the Revenue Recovery Certificate (RRC) are hereby quashed. 5. The petitioner is directed to approach before the SDO (R), Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) by filing an appropriate application annexing with this order within a period of 15 days. 6. With this observation and direction, this petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge AMIT PATEL