Jagriti Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh (Self Help Group) v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2218 of 2020

1. Jagriti Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh (Self Help Group) Sargaon, Through Its President - Rashmi Yadav W/o Ram Gopal, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Guru Govind Ward, Sargaon, District - Mungeli (Chhattisgarh),

2. Unnati Mahila Swa-Sahayata Samooh (Self Help Group) Sargaon, Through Its President - Ram Kunwar Sahu, W/o Pachkauu Sahu, Aged About 65 Years, R/o House No. 20, Atal Ward No. 14, Hakim Nagar, Sargaon ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Woman And Child Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (Chhattisgarh),

2. The Commissioner, Woman And Child Development Department, Raipur, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh),

3. The Collector Mungeli, District - Mungeli (Chhattisgarh),

4. The District Programme Officer, Woman And Child Development, Mungeli, District- Mungeli (Chhattisgarh),

5. The Project Officer Integrated Child Development Scheme, Pathariya, District - Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For State :

Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05.10.2020

1. The grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition seems to be the decision on the part of the respondents in proceeding with the advertisement issued on 23.06.2020 (Annexure P-2) for allotment of the work of distribution and supply of Ready to Eat supplementary nutritious food to the Anganwadi centres.

2. At the outset, this Court is of the view that the petitioners may not have any right conferred on them for the reason that both the

-2petitioners were awarded with a contract in July, 2015 and the period of the contract was for five years ending in July, 2020 and the petitioners were permitted to discharge their duties for the whole of five years tenure. It was foreseeing that the contract is coming to an end for which the respondents have issued an advertisement on 23.06.2020.

3. On a query being put to the counsel for the petitioners, he has accepted the fact that the petitioners also have the liberty to participate in the said advertisement. At this juncture, the counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had approached the Collector for continuing with the existing advertisement for some time taking into consideration of the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic. It appears that the Collector has also vide Annexure P-5 dated 17.08.2020 has passed some orders.

4. Given the fact that the Collector has already passed some orders, this Court at this juncture would be reluctant to entertain the writ petition for this reason.

5. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands rejected. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to approach the District Collector, District Mungeli for appropriate relief or direction in terms of the order of the Collector dated 17.08.2020. The present writ petition accordingly stands disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha