1 CGHC010331712026 2026:CGHC:38052 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4398 of 2026 Priyadarshani Mahila Upbhokta Sahkari Bhandar Maryadit Rajnandgaon Jnandgaon Rajnandgoan Through President Smti, Bharti Jain W/o Manoj Jain Aged About 55, Years, R/o Ganj Line Ward No. 27, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon C. G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Food And Civil Supply Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur District Raipur C. G. 2 - The Collector Food Department Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgoan C. G. 3 - The Food Officer, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon C. G. 4 - The Assistant Food Inspector Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon C. G. 5 - President Of Janshanti Mahila Prathmik Upbhokta Sakhari Bhandar Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon C.G. Operator Of Govt. Fairre Price Shop Of I D No. 421001004. Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgoan C. G. ... Respondent (Cause title taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Shri AN Pandey, Advocte. For Respondent/State : Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Dy. A.G. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL 2 25/08/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is running a Fair Price Shop at Ward No.18, Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.). Based on a report submitted by the Assistant Food Inspector-Respondent No.4, wherein certain deficiencies were found; respondent No.3/ Food Officer issued a show-cause notice on 06.07.2026, calling for an explanation from the petitioner as to why proceeding should not be initiated against him for cancellation of his licence and for prosecution. He further contended that without granting an opportunity of hearing or allowing for a reply/explanation to be submitted by petitioner, the concerned Food Officer has passed an impugned order dated 24.07.2026 Annexure P/1 suspending the allotment of the Fair Price Shop of the petitioner. He further contended that under Clause 16 of Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 (for short “Control Order, 2016), a provision of penalty is provided. Furthermore, time limit prescribed for conclusion of proceedings is 3 months for redressal of such cases; hence, no action suspending the shop ought to have been taken against the petitioner by the concerned Food Officer. He submits that similar nature of prayer made by petitioners in WPC No. 761/2026, came to be disposed of vide order dated 12.08.2026 directing the concerned authority to conclude the proceedings within the stipulated time and till then, order of status quo has been passed, hence, similar direction may be issued in this petition as well. 3 2. Learned counsel for the respondents would not oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition. 4. Considering the provision under Clause 16(1) of the Control Order, 2016, which prescribe a time period of 3 months for concluding the proceedings, respondent No.3/Food Officer is directed to conclude the proceedings in terms of Clause 16(1) within a further period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. It is further directed that till the proceedings before the concerned Food Officer are concluded, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. CC as per rules. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge AMIT PATEL