High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/65/2020disposed off

Pramila Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-01-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 65 of 2020 Pramila Yadav W/o Santuram Yadav, Aged About 35 Years, PostSecretary, Anamika Women's Self Help Group, R/o Dhangwa, Tehsil Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Food And Public Distribution, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhwan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. Tehsildar Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. Secretary, Gram Panchayat Thakurdev, Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Faisal Akhtar, Advocate For State :

Mr. V. R. Tiwari, Addl. A.G. with Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 10.01.2020

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order of suspension and the order of recovery dated 20.11.2019 Annexure P-1 & P-2.

2. Perusal of the record would show that there are disputed questions of facts involved in the present case which would require appreciation of

the records and the factual matrix of the case.

3. The allotment of shop to the petitioner has been under the Chhattisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 (in short "the Control Order of 2016"). Clause 18 of the said Control Order provides for an appeal to the designated officer. The order under challenge in the present writ petition is also one which is appealable to the designated officer.

4. Given the fact that there is an alternative remedy available to the petitioner under the Control Order of 2016, this Court is reluctant to entertain the writ petition at this juncture.

5. Reserving the right of the petitioner to avail the said remedy of appeal, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

6. In the event the petitioner prefers an appeal promptly, it is expected that the designated officer would decide the appeal and take a decision at the earliest. The petitioner would also be at liberty to seek for an interim protection from the designated Officer so far as the order of recovery is concerned.

Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai