Jagriti Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 5 of 2018 Jagriti Mahila Swa Sahayta Samuh, Gram Piseed, Development Block Kasdol, District Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) through it's President, Smt. Sukrita Patel, wife of Shri Kamta Prasad Patel, aged about 38 years, resident of village Piseed, Post Piseed, Thana Kasdol, Development Block Kasdol, Distrtict Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Commissioner, Department of Women and Child Development, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Mandir Hasod, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. District Collector, Collectorate, Baloda Bazar, District Baloda BazarBhatapara (C.G.)
4. District Programme Officer, Women and Child Development Department, Collectorate Compound, District Baloda BazarBhatapara (C.G.)
5. Child Development Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Project, Kasdol,District Baloda Bazaar - Bhatapara (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Shri Amrito Das, Advocate.
For Respondents/State : Shri Arun Sao, Dy. Advocate General. Order On Board 27/02/2018 (1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that by virtue of clause 11.3 of the amended instructions dated 05.06.2017, the petitioner is entitled to continue for the period of five years and then only the circular dated 05.06.2017 would apply but on the other hand by order dated 01.02.2018, District Programme Officer has called for fresh application for supply of ready to eat food for his area i.e. Sector Kasdol under the Kasdol area project.
(2) Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to make representation before the District Programme Officer within a period of seven days from today bringing to his notice Clause 11.3 of the amended instructions dated 05.06.2017, which will be considered and decided within a further period of seven days from the date of receipt of such representation in accordance with law.
(3) With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.
Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-