Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:48469 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5032 of 2025 1 - Umesh Kumar Kola S/o Shri Soma Ram Kola Aged About 29 Years In-Charge Of Procurement Center, Aadim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Lohattar R/o. Village- Gumdi, District- North Baster Kanker (C.G.) 2 - Virendra Kumar Purame S/o Shri Premlal Purame Aged About 41 Years Computer Operator, Aadim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Lohattar, R/o. Sethpara, Sonadai, Lohattar, District - North Baster Kanker (C.G.) 3 - Naresh Kumar Diwan S/o Shri Agnu Ram Aged About 29 Years Bardana Prabhari Of Aadim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Lohattar, R/o Village- Lohattar, Netapara, District- North Baster Kanker (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Co-Operative Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar New Raipur, District- (C.G.) Raipur 2 - Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Marketing Federation Ltd., 6th Floor, Tower-C Commercial Complex, Cbd Section 21, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Kanker Distt.- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 4 - Commissioner Co-Operative/deputy Registrar Co-Operative Societies Kanker, Distt.- North Baster Kanker (C.G.) 5 - District Co-Operative Markfed Officer Kanker, Distt.- North Baster Kanker (C.G.) 6 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit Jagdalpur, Regional Office - Behind Jhankar Talkies, Kewra Munda VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.09.22 18:32:00 +0530 2 Ward, Jagdalpur, Distt.- Bastar (C.G.) 7 - Branch Manager Manager, Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit Jagdalpur, Branch Durgukondal, Distt.- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 8 - Adim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Lohattar Through Its Prescribed Officer, Lamps Lohattar, Distt. - North Baster Kanker (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Akanksha Verma, PL 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. Petitioners have filed this writ petition with following reliefs: “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ by quashing the impugned order dated 02.08.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the respondent No.6. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ commanding and directing the respondents authorities to provide the benefit of dryness of paddy. 10.3 That the respondents may kindly be directed to calculate the dryness percentage of paddy and to take appropriate action against responsible officer who has not lifted the paddy within the prescribed period as per policy and instructions issued time to time. 10.4 Any other relief which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit 3 and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 02.08.2025 issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Jagdalpur by which without any enquiry and without fixing the liability a direction has been issued to complete the shortage of paddy by depositing 578.10 quintal paddy for Lohattar Center within 07 days otherwise, the amount shall be recovered from the employees of the society. The said order is issued to the Manager of the Society, but it has been mentioned that the employee of the society are responsible and the amount is to be recovered from them though no any order or notice has been given to the petitioners who are employees of the society and engaged only of paddy procurement season. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the submission of learned counsel for petitioners and submits that upon completion of upliftment and transportation of paddy purchased by petitioners 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 the order passed by this Court in similar writ 4 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 petitioners 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 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$। 5 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
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 to cooperate in the proceedings of the inquiry, if any, conducted by respondent -authority. 9. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are being threatened for taking coercive action against them, if they fail to meet out the shortage of paddy, therefore, it is directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners, if they submits the 6 representation within specified time till decision on their representation. CC as per rules. (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Sd/- Vasant