Jeevan Lal Kermo S/o Late Shivnath Kermo Aged About 52 Years Occupation Manager Of v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:48474 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5019 of 2025 Jeevan Lal Kermo S/o Late Shivnath Kermo Aged About 52 Years Occupation Manager Of Paddy Procurement Center Baijanpuri, Lams R/o Village Baijanpuri, Tahsil Bhanupratappur, District (North Bastar) Kanker Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Raipur, Police Station - Rakhi, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.09.22 18:32:01 +0530 2 - Collector (Co-Operative Branch) Uttar-Bastar-Kanker, District Uttar Bastar Kanker 3 - Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Marketing Federation Limited, 6th Floor, Tower-C, Commercial Complex C B D, Sector 21, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Deputy Registrar Co-Operative Societies Uttar Bastar Kanker, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh 5 - District Marketing Officer Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Vipadan Sangh Maryadit Kanker, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh 6 - Chief Executive Officer District Co-Operative Central Bank Maryadit Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
the order passed by this Court in similar writ petitions. Learned State counsel also submits that as the loss of paddy is causing loss of State exchequer, and therefore the Collector has issued a direction to initiate appropriate proceedings for recovery of amount towards the loss of aforementioned quantity of paddy or for recovery of aforementioned quantity of paddy, hence, the action cannot be said to be arbitrary or illegal. 4. I have heard learned counsels for the respective parties and also perused the copy of tripartite agreement enclosed along with this writ petition. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is mainly that no action can be taken against the petitioner in the individual capacity if for any reason there is shortage in the quantity of paddy and that too unless and until some inquiry is conducted. Clause 5.6 of the Agreement reads as under: "5.6- वि(cid:2)पणन सं(cid:7)घ ቛኋ(cid:10)रा(cid:10) ्ቚदा(cid:10)य की(cid:16) गई रा(cid:10)शि(cid:20) सं(cid:21) उप(cid:10)्ቌ(cid:24)न की(cid:21) न््ቖ (संमि(cid:28)मि(cid:29)) ቛኋ(cid:10)रा(cid:10) धा(cid:10)न वि(cid:2)पणन सं(cid:7)घ की(cid:31) की(cid:28) ्ቚ(cid:10)प्(cid:29) हो(cid:31)न(cid:21) परा (cid:20)(cid:21)ष रा(cid:10)शि(cid:20) की(cid:16) (cid:2)संली$ संमि(cid:28)मि(cid:29) की(cid:31) ्ቚदा(cid:10)य की(cid:28)$(cid:20)न ए(cid:2)(cid:7) अन्य अन’सं(cid:10)(cid:7)विगकी (cid:28)दा(cid:10)( सं(cid:21) रा(cid:10)शि(cid:20) की(cid:16) कीटौ*(cid:29)$ की(cid:16) ्ቌ(cid:10)(cid:2)(cid:21)ग$ । इसंकी(cid:21) उपरा(cid:10)(cid:7)(cid:29) भी$ (cid:2)सं.ली$ य(cid:31)ग्य रा(cid:10)शि(cid:20) (cid:20)(cid:21)ष राहोन(cid:21) परा जि्ቌली(cid:10) वि(cid:2)पणन अमिधाकी(cid:10)रा1 5 ቛኋ(cid:10)रा(cid:10) छ.ग. रा(cid:10)ज्य संहोकी(cid:10)रा1 सं(cid:31)सं(cid:10)यटौ$ अमिधाविनय(cid:28) 1960 की(cid:21) अ(cid:7)(cid:29)ग(cid:24)(cid:29) (cid:2)सं.ली$ की(cid:10)य(cid:24)(cid:2)(cid:10)हो$ हो(cid:21)(cid:29)’ सं्ቌ(cid:28) न्य(cid:10)य(cid:10)लीय (cid:28)( ्ቚकीराण दा्ቌ(cid:24) विकीय(cid:10) ्ቌ(cid:10)(cid:2)(cid:21)ग(cid:10)।" 6. Clause 13 of the Agreement provides for arbitration of the dispute between the parties, reads as under :- "13- आቜኌ78ኔ(cid:21)(cid:20)न :- इसं अन’7(cid:7)धा की(cid:16) विकीसं$ भी$ कीቄኌ;<की(cid:10) सं(cid:21) सं(cid:7)7(cid:7)मिधा(cid:29) वि(cid:2)(cid:2)(cid:10)दा उत्पन्न हो(cid:31)न(cid:21) की(cid:16) ቄኌ>?मि(cid:29) (cid:28)( वि(cid:2)(cid:2)(cid:10)दा की(cid:21) विनण(cid:24)य हो(cid:21)(cid:29)’ जि्ቌली(cid:21) (cid:28)( जि्ቌली(cid:10) कीली(cid:21)क्टौरा की(cid:10) विनण(cid:24)य अቌኌन्(cid:29)(cid:28) हो(cid:31)ग(cid:10) ्ቌ(cid:31) उभीयप्ቌ(cid:10)( की(cid:31) (cid:28)(cid:10)न्य हो(cid:31)ग(cid:10)। कीली(cid:21)क्टौरा ቛኋ(cid:10)रा(cid:10) दिदाय(cid:21) गय(cid:21) विनण(cid:24)य की(cid:16) अप$ली उभीयप्ቌ(cid:10)( ቛኋ(cid:10)रा(cid:10) सं(cid:7)7(cid:7)मिधा(cid:29) जि्ቌली(cid:21) की(cid:21) सं(cid:7)भी(cid:10)ग$य आय’क्(cid:29) की(cid:31) की(cid:16) ्ቌ(cid:10) संकी(cid:21) ग$। 7. Under clause 5.6 of the Agreement, there is specific provision as to the recovery of the loss suffered by the Marketing Federation to be made from the concerned Society, wherein primarily, it is to be recovered from the commission and other heads for which the Society is entitled, for their services rendered in paddy procurement. If further amount is left, then the recovery proceedings is to be initiated under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. 8. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, aforementioned relevant clauses of the agreement as also considering the copy of the policy formulated by the State Govt. which is placed before this Court for consideration, this writ petition is disposed of with a permission to the petitioner to file representation before the Collector in terms of Clause 14 of the Agreement within a period of ‘03 weeks’ from today. The Collector, in turn, shall adjudicate upon the grounds raised by
Arguments
: Mr. Kunal Das, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Ajit Singh, GA 2 For Respondent-MARKFED : Mr. Priyanshu Ojha, Advocate on behalf of Mr. RK Jha, Advocate. For Respondent-Bank : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 22.09.2025 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition with following reliefs: “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records of the case, from the authorities. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 02.08.2025 passed by the respondent no.6 bank (Annexure P/1), in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is holding the post of ‘Manager-cum-Incharge’ and also worked as In-charge of Paddy Procurement Centre as mentioned in cause title of the writ petition. Petitioner has purchased the paddy under the Policy formulated by the respondents. According to the tripartite agreement entered into between the parties, last / cut-off date for lifting of paddy in the kharif season 2024-25 was till 31.01.2025, accordingly, petitioner has purchased the paddy. In the said agreement entered into between the parties, it is an obligation on the part of the respondent -Marketing Federation to lift the paddy from the Procurement Centre and to store in particular place within 3 specified period. However, respondents- Marketing Federation failed to lift paddy purchased by petitioner-society within specified time from the date of its purchase. Entire paddy purchased by society was dumped in the open sky at Paddy Procurement Centre under direct sunlight due to which moisture of paddy dried and had suffered loss of weight. He further contended that after lifting and transportation of paddy from Paddy Procurement Centre, the petitioner are being harassed and threatened by the respondent-authorities through the Police administration by calling him in the police station, keeping him sitting there for whole day and also threatening to register case against him, without following the due procedure as provided under the Policy formulated by the State Government, providing the petitioner an opportunity to explain as to whether, there is any loss or not. Petitioner is also being called by the authorities and being threatened to fulfill the loss due to shortage of paddy, without there being any proper assessment of the shortage. The action on the part of respondents is per se illegal and arbitrary. petitioner was not issued any show cause notice nor given any intimation as to what was the actual loss. He also contended that earlier also similar actions were taken against which several writ petitions were filed in which this Court taking note of the clauses of agreement had permitted petitioner therein to avail remedy of arbitration under Clause- 13 of the agreement and till decision of proceedings under the arbitration to be submitted before the Collector, interest of petitioner therein were also protected. He submits that case of petitioner are also on similar footing and, therefore, similar order may be passed in his favor. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the submission of learned 4 counsel for petitioner and submits that upon completion of upliftment and transportation of paddy purchased by petitioner at Paddy Procurement Centre, shortage of paddy was found, petitioner could not able to give proper and satisfactory reply and therefore, the proceeding have been initiated. However, he does not dispute the submission of learned counsel for petitioner based on Clause 5.6 and 13 of tripartite agreement. He also does not dispute the submission of learned counsel for petitioner based on
Decision
the writ petitioner and will also be at liberty to invoke Clause -14 of the proforma agreement and to pass order on the said representation at the earliest after receipt of such representation. The petitioner is also directed 6 to cooperate in the proceedings of the inquiry, if any, conducted by respondent -authority. 9. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is being threatened for taking coercive action against him if he fails to meet out the shortage of paddy, therefore, it is directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner if he submits the representation within specified time till decision on his representation. CC as per rules. Vasant Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge