Tulsi Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1281 of 2021

1. Tulsi Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh Through Smt. Manmati, W/o Ganpat, Aged About 45 Years, President, Tulsi Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh, Dumarkhola, Balrampur, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh)

2. Smt. Sushila W/o Son Sai Aged About 35 Years Secretary, Tulsi Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh, Dumarkhola, Balrampur, Distt. BalrampurRamanujganj (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Supplies, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Collector (Food Branch) Balrampur-Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh),

3. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Balrampur, Distt. BalrampurRamanujganj (Chhattisgarh)

4. Food Inspector Balrampur, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh)

5. Government Fair Price Shop Davra, Balrampur, Distt. BalrampurRamanujganj (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jha, Advocate For State :

Mrs. Richa Shukla, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 04.03.2021

1. Heard.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were running a Fair Price Shop and on an inspection made by the Food Inspector on 13.07.2020, no default was found in running of the Fair

Price Shop and everything was found to be in order. Despite that, on the same ground the suspension has been passed on 27.08.2020 (Annexure P/1). He submits that neither any notice nor any hearing was given to the petitioner. It is further submitted that the reply was filed by the petitioner on 19.08.2020 and thereafter nothing has been heard.

3. Without going into the facts of this case, since the suspension order was passed on 27.08.2020 vide Annexure P/1 and since it is stated that the petitioner has not been heard and the final order has also not been passed under Order 16(1) of the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 (for short 'the Control Order 2016') and the order contemplates that the time limit for redressal of the issue should not exceed three months and therefore since the considerable time has been passed, the SDO Balrampur Ramanujganj is directed to hear the case of the petitioner and decide the same within a further period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

4. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Vishakha