1 CGHC010089852021 2026:CGHC:35407 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1935 of 2021 1. M/s Shri Narayan Parvati Rice Industries A Proprietorship Firm Through Its Sole Proprietor Gopal Modi, S/o Late Narayan Prasad Modi, Aged About 48 Years R/o Near Bajrang Talkies Main Road Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Capital Complex Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. Collector (Food Branch) Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh 3. Director, Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Directorate Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4. Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited Korba, Through Its District Manager, Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Collectorate, Korba, District Chhattisgarh 5. Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation, Through Its Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation 6th Floor, Tower C, Commercial Complex, Cbd, Sector 21, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 6. Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation, 6th Floor, Tower C, Commercial Complex, Cbd, SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Date: 2026.08.12 14:14:56 +0530 2 Sector 21, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 7. District Marketing Officer, Chhatisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Arpan Verma, Advocate For Respondent No.1 to 3 : Mr. D. Shrivastava, Dy. Advocate General For Respondent No.5 to 7 : Mr. Ashish Surana, Advocate through virtual mode. SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 11.08.2026 1. This writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs:- “1] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions and the order passed by the Managing Director dated 29- 30/12/2020 (Annex.P/1) may kindly be set-aside and the respondent authorities may kindly be directed to comply the order/directions of Collector Korba dated 09.09.2019 within a stipulated period of two months and the respondent authorities may further be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for grant Protsahan Rashi/incentive as per clause No. 9.1 of agreement and clause 5.1 of the state policy. 2] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions and if the Hon'ble Court reached to a conclusion that the decision of the Collector Korba dated 09.09.2019 (Annex.P/5) is not a decision covered under clause 15.1 of the agreement then the Hon'ble Court in alternatively may kindly be directed to collector, who is the adjudicatory authority under clause 15.1 of the 3 agreement, to take a fresh decision in light of clause No. 9.1 of the agreement dated 23.11.2018 and clause No. 5.1 of the policy dated 01.09.2018 within a stipulated period. 3]That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is a rice miller. On 23.11.2018 petitioner had entered into an agreement with respondent Nos.5 to 7 for custom milling of rice. As per Circular dated 01.09.2018 of the State Government, petitioner is entitled for incentive on custom milled rice. When the petitioner was not granted incentive on custom milled rice, he filed writ petition before this Court bearing WPC No.2421/2020 which was disposed of vide order dated 27.10.2020 with a direction to Managing Director, CG State Cooperative Marketing Federation, Raipur to take decision on the claim of petitioner for grant of incentive, taking into consideration Clause 15.1 of the agreement dated 23.11.2018 as also the order of the State Government dated 26.09.2019. Petitioner submitted representation before the respondent No.6 herein and the same was rejected vide order dated 30.12.2020 (Annexure P-1). He contended that respondent No.2-Collector has recommended to consider the 4 claim of petitioner for grant of incentive, but the same has been overlooked. 3. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 7 would submit that petitioner is having efficacious alternate remedy under the agreement dated 23.11.2018, in particular under Clause 15.1, according to which, petitioner can submit representation before the Collector and if petitioner is not satisfied with the decision of the Collector, he is having further remedy of arbitration. Hence, present writ petition is liable to be dismissed in view of availability of efficacious alternate remedy available to petitioner under the agreement. 4. Heard learned counsel for respective parties and perused the documents annexed along with writ petition. 5. It is not in dispute that pursuant to order dated 27.10.2020 passed in WPC No.2421/2020, petitioner submitted representation before respondent No.6 herein, which was considered and dismissed vide order dated 30.12.2020 for the reasons mentioned thereunder. If petitioner is aggrieved with the decision taken on his claim for grant of incentive on custom milled rice, petitioner is having efficacious alternate remedy under Clause 15 and 16 of the agreement dated 23.11.2018 which are as follows:- “15. न :- आशन :- 5 15.1 इ त उ !न "#$त उय&! '( न )ए त +) ),( ! अ.यन /#त0त य + 1। त +) ),( '( अ.यन य 1य न य उय&! ! 3य !1। 16. आशन :- 16.1 अन0 15.1 अत1त त + ),( '( य 1य न य 45 उय&6 '( न य त0 60 त( आशन त0 आन /#त0त य + 1। आ( नय07 (8य शन '( न19( आत ए (. 1 '( +1। + न य अत !1 +! उय&! ! 3य !1। 16.2. आशन य 1य न य य उय & !ई त0; !त < त! अ3य /न! उय!1 ( 1। " 6. In the aforementioned facts of the case, as the petitioner is having efficacious alternate remedy available under Clause 15 of the agreement and the authority can consider and decide the grievance, to be raised by petitioner, based on the material and evidence to be placed before it, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed on the ground that petitioner is having efficacious alternate remedy under the agreement. 6 7. However, petitioner will be at liberty to take recourse to remedy available under Clause 15 and 16 of the agreement dated 23.11.2018. While considering the claim, if any, raised by the petitioner for grant of incentive on custom milled rice, the authority concerned shall also take into consideration the date of filing of this writ petition and its pendency before the High Court. 8. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/-