Damodar Singh, (In Person), v. The Union Of India, Through The Principal Secretary,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1629 of 2023 In Letters Patent Appeal No.454 of 2019 ====================================================== Damodar Singh, (In person), Son of Late Bhikhar Singh Resident of VillageFakuli, P.O. -Fakuli, Southern Tola, Near Naini, P.S.-Chapra Muffasil, District-Saran at Chapra Pin Code -841301,(Bihar) Present Address- MohallaOpposite Homeopathic Medical College, Gudari Bazar, P.O. Rajendra College, Gudari Bazar, Chapra, P.S.- Bhagwan Bazar Chapra, District- Saran at Chapra- 841301 (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India, through the Principal Secretary, Department of the Agriculture and Marketing, Government of India, Room No.-12, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi-110001. Mr. Sanjay Agrawal. 2.

Sri Ritesh Chauhan, The Managing Director, National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. NAFED, House-1, Sidharath Enclave, Ring Road, Ashram Chowk, New Delhi 110014. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Damodar Singh (In Person) For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. K.N. Singh, ASG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 04-04-2025 The writ petition preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on the preliminary objection that direction was sought against the National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Limited (NAFED), which is a cooperative organisation which does not fall in the category of State as defined under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

2. The petitioner appealed against the

Patna High Court MJC No.1629 of 2023(4) dt.04-04-2025 2/2 aforenoted judgment, which too was dismissed. However, while dismissing the Intra-Court Appeal of the petitioner, this Court had observed that it will be open for the petitioner/appellant to approach the cooperative federation or any other appropriate forum for the needful, in case so deemed necessary.

3. It appears that the petitioner approached the NAFED but no decision was taken.

4. We are afraid whether any contempt jurisdiction of this Court could be invoked under the aforenoted circumstances.

5. The petitioner would be well advised to approach the appropriate forum, perhaps the Civil Courts for the needful.

6. The petition is dismissed.

(Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ) (Harish Kumar, J) Rajesh/Saurav U