Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33629 (CHH)

SANGAM MAHILA SWA SAHAYATA SAMUH v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/3089/2024 · 2026-08-23

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010195342024 2026:CGHC:37840 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3089 of 2024 1 - Sangam Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh Village Bardeeh, Tahsil Tilda Newra, District Raipur (C.G.) Through President, Smt. Taamin Banjare, W/o Shri Sukchand Banjare, Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Bardih, Tahsil Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Additional Collector District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Rev.) Sub Division Tilda Newra, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Block Education Officer Block Tilda Newra, District Raipur (C.G.) 5 - School Management Committee Government Primary School, Bardih, Tahsil Newra, District Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Head Master Government Primary School Bardih, Tahsil Tilda Newra, District Raipur (C.G.) 7 - Jai Banjari Mata Swa Sahayata Samuh Bardih, District Raipur (C.G.) Through President Secretary ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate. For State : Shri Shreyansh Mehta, PL. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 24/08/2026 1. This Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly call for the entire AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2026.08.25 10:43:11 +0530 2 record in relates to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly be pleased to issued a writ /or writs / order / or orders / to quashed the orders dated 01.09.2023 (Annexure P-1), passed by the Respondent No.01 and order dated 14.06.2023 (Annexure P- 2), passed by the Respondent No.02 and further the Respondent authorities be directed to allow the petitioner society to run the midday meals in the Government Primary School Bardih, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, any other relief, this Hon'ble Court, deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioners, in the interest of justice. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Petitioner is a Society duly registered under the Societies Registration Act vide Registration Certificate No. 122202245823. Smt. Taamin Banjare was appointed/elected as the President of the Petitioner Society, whereas Smt. Uttari Bai Sonwani was appointed/elected as its Secretary. Petitioner Society was engaged in the work of providing Mid-Day Meals to the students of Government Primary School, Bardih, and was discharging the said responsibility in accordance with the applicable rules and procedure. For the purpose of better administration and management of the affairs of the Petitioner Society, the Petitioner submitted an application before Respondent No. 4 seeking change in the membership of the Society. Upon receipt of the said application, Respondent No. 4 conducted an enquiry in the presence of the members of the committee and thereafter submitted its enquiry report to Respondent No. 3 for consideration and appropriate action. Thereafter, Respondent No. 3, vide order dated 20.01.2023, terminated the arrangement/engagement of the Petitioner Society for providing Mid-Day Meals to the students and authorized Respondent No. 5 to appoint an agency for providing Mid-Day Meals to the students after following the due procedure prescribed under law. Being 3 aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 20.01.2023, the Petitioner Society preferred an application/appeal before Respondent No. 2, which was registered as Case No. 202302113000053/458/121 for the year 2022-23. Respondent No. 3, vide order dated 14.06.2023 (Annexure P-2), rejected the application preferred by the Petitioner Society, without properly appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case and the grievance raised by the Petitioner. Thereafter, being aggrieved by the order dated 14.06.2023 (Annexure P-2), the Petitioner Society preferred an application/representation dated 30.06.2023 before Respondent No. 1, seeking redressal of its grievance and challenging the action taken against the Petitioner Society. Respondent No. 1, vide order dated 01.09.2023 (Annexure P-1), rejected the application submitted by the Petitioner on the ground that the issue involved in the matter did not pertain to the Department of School Education. The aforesaid reasoning adopted by Respondent No. 1 is erroneous and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly when the dispute directly concerns the termination of the Petitioner Society from the work of providing Mid-Day Meals to the students of Government Primary School, Bardih and the consequential authorization for appointment of another agency. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the Petitioner Society is aggrieved by the orders dated 14.06.2023 and 01.09.2023 and the consequential action taken against it, as the same have adversely affected the Petitioner Society without proper consideration of its case and without affording it an effective and lawful remedy, however, at this stage, he submits that the petitioner Society still wants to run the mid-day meal program, as 4 such, he would only press this petition for a limited prayer which is for expeditious disposal of his representation dated 30.06.2023 (Annexure P/6) which is pending before Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur C.G. 4. Learned State counsel would not oppose the limited prayer of petitioner. 5. Having regard to the limited prayer made by the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent authorities to decide the representation dated 30.06.2023 (Annexure P/6) of the petitioner within a reasonable time, in accordance with law by passing appropriate orders. 6. It is made clear that the concerned authority shall decide the representation of the petitioner on its own merits without being influenced by this order and the impugned orders which has been challenged by the petitioner have not been set aside by this Court in this order. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Avinash