1 2026:CGHC:14321 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1327 of 2026 1 - Prathmik Krishi Sakh Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Rudha Procurement Center Rudha, Registered Society Under Cooperative Societies Act, Registration No. 1348, Through Its Assistant Committee Manager And In-Charge Committee- Lalit Kumar Das, S/o Shri Tapneshwar Das, Aged About 56 Years, Procurement Center Rudha, Branch Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited (Markfed), Sector- 21, C.B.D. Complex, 6th Floor, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Registrar Chhattisgarh Cooperative Society, Indrawati Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Bank Limited Raipur, Padri, Indira Gandhi Parisar, District Raipur (C.G.) 5 - The Collector Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 6 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2026.03.27 17:00:00 +0530 2 7 - District Marketing Officer Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Maryadit, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 8 - The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Societies Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 9 - Branch Manager Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Raipur Branch Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 10 - The Officer On Special Duty Apex Bank, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 11 - The Chief Executive Officer Head Office District Cooperative Central Bank Limited Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 12 - The Nodal Officer District Cooperative Central Bank Limited Raipur, Branch Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Roop Ram Naik, Adv. For Respondent No. 1, 5 and 6. : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer. For respondent No. 2 : Mr. Vikram Sharma, Adv. For other Respondents : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Adv. and Mr. Raman Patel, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Adv. for their respective respondents. Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board 25-3-2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/direction, commanding the Respondents No. 2 & 7 to lift and transport the entire remaining stock of purchased paddy in accordance with the 3 Paddy Procurement Policy 2025-26 at the earliest. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to restrain the respondents/Authorities from taking any coercive action, including the registration of FIRs or recovery proceedings against the Petitioner Society or its office bearers, for variation in quality of paddy resulting from the respondents' inaction to lift/transport the stock. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case in the favour of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the paddy procurement process was completed on 06.02.2026, however, the stock position of paddy as on 06.02.2026 was 42,374.40 quintals and due to non-lifting of procured paddy by respondent No.2 and 7, the stock at the procurement center exceeded the prescribed buffer limit. Therefore, relief as prayed, may be granted to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that a tripartite agreement was executed between Petitioner-Society, District Cooperative Central Bank and Markfed on 27.11.2025. They also submit that as per Clause 2.8 of the said agreement, the last date for lifting procured paddy is 31.03.2026. Hence, at this stage, this writ petition is premature and not maintainable. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would not oppose the aforesaid clause of the agreement. 5. Having considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and upon perusal of the documents placed before 4 the Court, this Court finds that the grievances raised in this writ petition are at an early stage. Consequently, this Court is of the opinion that the present writ petition is premature at this stage, and hence this Court is not inclined to entertain the same on merits at this juncture. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. 7. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge pathak