Jagriti Mahila Sangathan Swa Sahayta Samuh v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1373 of 2020 Jagriti Mahila Sangathan Swa Sahayta Samuh Aamapali Chowk, Jaijaipur, Tehsil- Jaijaipur, District- Jangir Champa, Chhattisgarh., District : JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Women And Child Development Dept., Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Collector District- Janjgir Champa., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

3. The Program Officer, Women And Child Development Dept., Janjgir Champa., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

4. The Project Officer Akikrit Bal Vikash Pariyojna, Jaijaipur, Dist.- Janjgir Champa., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Ajay Chandra, Advocate For State/Respondents : Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A. For .

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 16/07/2020

1. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the arbitrary action on the part of the respondent No. 4 in awarding marks while deciding the grades/merits of the different self-help groups in the selection process for supply of Ready to Eat Meal under supplementary Nutritious Food Program of the State Government.

2. At this juncture, the Learned State counsel points out that the Project Officer has called upon the objections in respect of awarding of marks and also providing the gradings to each of the self-help groups, therefore the writ petition at this juncture is premature.

3. Counsel for the Petitioner apprehends that though the petitionerssociety have preferred the objections, however there is a possibility that the Respondent No. 4 before deciding the objections itself may

finalize the selection process and thereby the interest of the petitioners would get defeated.

4. The further contention of the State Counsel is that under the guidelines governing the field there is a provision of an appeal first to the Collector and thereafter to the Commissioner which remedy is also available to the petitioners.

5. Given the aforesaid submissions made by the Counsel appearing on either side, this Court is of the opinion that since as per the petitioners, they have already preferred objections against the awarding of marks and the gradings given to the different self-help groups it would be more appropriate, if the respondent-authorities are directed to consider/decide the objections so filed by the petitioners in accordance with law at the earliest. While deciding the objections, the concerned authority is expected to pass a reasoned order after considering the contentions that shall be raised in the objections.

6. Meanwhile, it is directed that till the objections of the petitioners are decided objectively, the Respondent No.4- Authority shall not finalize the selection of the self-help groups for supply of Ready to Eat Meal under government's supplementary Nutritious Food Program.

7. It is further made clear that if the petitioners have not preferred objections till date, let the petitioners prefer an objection within a period of 7 days from today.

8. With the aforesaid directions/observations, the writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit