The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 An Appeal under Rule-6 of Chapter-III of the Rules of the High Court of Orissa read with Article-4 of Orissa High Court Rules, 1948 and Clause -10 of the Letters Patent. Maa Budhimangala SHG, Kendrapara ::: Appellant -: VERSUS :- State of Odisha & Another ::: Respondents Advocates appeared in this case:- For the Appellant ::: Mr. Manoj Ku. Mohanty, For the Respondents ::: Mr. Prem Ku Mohanty, Advocate. Addl. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK AND
Legal Reasoning
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO J U D G M E N T DECIDED ON 24.09.2025 PER MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO, J. 1. The appellant, a Self-Help Group (SHG) has been preparing and supplying Take Home Ration (THR) ‘Chhatua’ to different specified Anganwadi Centres under Rajnagar Block in the district of Kendrapara, it W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 Page 1 of 10 challenges the judgment dated 13th November, 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.27865 of 2024. 2. Pursuant to our order dated 19th September, 2025, the English translation of the Annexures-4, 5, 6 and 7
Decision
in the writ petition which are in vernacular ‘Odia’ either handwritten or typed, have been made, typed and furnished before this Court by memo dated 22nd September, 2025, the same are taken on record. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that while passing the order as at Annexure-6 to the writ petition (which is also annexed to the writ appeal i.e. order dated 5th November, 2024, of which English translation has made available), issued by the respondent-Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), the show-cause furnished by the appellant-SHG regarding non-supply of THR has not been taken into account. The second submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the CDPO/DSWO are not the authority whereas the Collector is the authority to pass such order for discontinuance of the ‘supply order’ issued earlier by order dated 15.07.2024 by the District Social Welfare Officer (DSWO). 4. Considering that, the substantial factual disputes have been raised by the petitioner-appellant in the writ petition, we have heard learned counsel for the appellant at length regarding contract/agreement entered between the parties i.e. between the appellant- Page 2 of 10 W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 implementing agency and the Child Development Project Officer, Rajnagar acting on behalf of the Government of Odisha dated 1st June, 2023, signed by the President of the appellant-Self Help Group and the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO) on behalf of Government of Odisha, for supply of THR ‘Chhatua’. 5. Thereafter, during course of hearing of the appeal, we have referred to the order dated 26th April, 2024 issued by the District Social Welfare Officer, after the period of THR supply contract was over. The DSWO intimated the order of the Collector, extending the approval of all THR units, till end of Model Code of Conduct imposed for the General Elections for preparation and distribution of Take Home Ration (THR) and upto selection of new ration provider/SHG. We have also considered the Annexure-4 to the writ petition also part of the writ appeal i.e. the show- cause notice (of which the English translation has been submitted) dated 4th November, 2024 as well as show- cause reply dated 05.11.2024 of which English Translation has been filed. 6. Further, we have perused and considered the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge. The paragraphs-2, 3, 4 and 5 relevant for the present adjudication are reproduced herein:- “2. In assailing the Annexure-6, Mr. Manoj Kumar Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a recognized WSHG, who has Page 3 of 10 W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 entered into an agreement to prepare and supply different ration under Take Home Ration (THR) scheme to different Anganwadi Centers under 22 Gram Panchayats (GPs) of Rajnagar Block w.e.f. 01.04.2023 for one year closing on 31.03.2024, but such agreement to supply the dry ration of the petitioner-WSHG was extended by DSWO on 15.07.2024 till selection of new SHG, however, in the midst of such arrangement, the petitioner-WSHG received one show cause notice from DSWO on 04.11.2024 to explain as to why it has not supplied the ration under MSPY to 91 Anganwadi Centers in the month of September, 113 Anganwadi Centers in the month of October and for not supplying Chhatua to 129 Anganwadi Centers in the month of October, within three days and, accordingly, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 05.11.2024, but without considering its explanation, the CDPO, illegally debarred the petitioner from Rajnagar supplying the ration for the month of November and, thereby, causing serious prejudice to the petitioner because Annexure-6 was issued on 05.11.2024, but by then, the petitioner had already prepared the rations for the month of November and in case the petitioner is not allowed to supply such rations, it would suffer heavy loss. Accordingly, Mr. Mohanty prays to interfere with Annexure-6. 3. On the other hand, Mr. B.P. Nayak, learned AGA by referring to the relevant Clauses (Preparation, Packaging and Delivery) of the agreement, submits that the mixing of Chhatua should be done on 23rd day of every month before the presence of concerned supervisors and after mixing of Chhatua on 23rd day of every month, it should be supplied to different Anganwadi Centers by 31st day of every month and, the therefore, petitioner that it could suffer loss for not being able Page 4 of 10 the contention as advanced for W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 to supply the ready stock prepared by the petitioner is baseless and contrary to the terms and conditions of the agreement. On the aforesaid submission, Mr. Nayak prays to dismiss the writ petition. 4. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, it appears that the show cause issued to the petitioner and the reply given by it are to be considered by the authority concerned strictly within the contours of the agreement, but the apprehension of the petitioner that he would suffer loss for not being able to supply the rations prepared for distribution can be well appreciated by the following clause of the agreement under the heading ’’Preparation, Packaging and Delivery":- 01. The mixing of Chhatua will be on a fixed day i.e. 23rd day of every month, before the presence of concerned supervisors, in order to maintain right quality and quantity. 02. The SHG after mixing on 23rd day of every month should deliver the THR (Chhatua) to the concerned AW Centres within 31st day of every month. 03. THR should be prepared by the SHG as per the monthly Indent received from the Office of the CDPO i.e. the list of beneficiaries under ICDS. 5. A bare look to the Annexure-6 would go to disclose that the petitioner has been stopped to supply the indent for the month of November on 05.11.2024, but the time fixed for preparing the Chhatua would be 23rd day of October for the indent of November and similarly, the time stipulated for delivery of the THR (Chhatua) is within 31st day of every month. So thus, the indent for the month of November must have to be supplied before 31st day W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 Page 5 of 10 of October and, thereby, the petitioner would not suffer any loss for being stopped to supply the the month of November, 2024 on indent 05.11.2024 as the petitioner should have already supplied the said indent by 31st October, 2024. for Accordingly, the plea as raised by the petitioner for suffering loss on account of being not able to supply the indent after 05.11.2024 would be without any basis and unacceptable. Thus, this Court does not find any merit in the writ application of the petitioner to quash Annexure-6 or to direct the OP to allow the petitioner to prepare and distribute THR to different Anganwadi Centers.” 7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that though in the writ petition, no specific contention was raised regarding the lack of authority on part of the CDPO, but as a legal issue, he is raising the contention that the CDPO had no authority to issue the order dated 05.11.2024 (Annexure-6). Since the said issue has been argued before us, we deem it proper to answer the same. 8. The agreement was entered between the CDPO on behalf of the Government of Odisha and the implementing agency i.e. petitioner-SHG. The agreement also does not provide that after completion of the period of the agreement, the supply has to be continued, and it can’t be stopped by the Collector. Agreement provides at internal page-5, paragraph-3.2, termination of contract which is reproduced herein:- W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 Page 6 of 10 In case THR “3.2. is not prepared as per specifications or is contaminated, the whole lot should be seized and rejected and the contract of the SHG shall be cancelled. The concerned SWHGs should be blacklisted and other WSHG should be immediately engaged for preparation of THR so that there is no disruption in the supply in the AWCs.” Under the heading “Termination of Contract”, it is provided thus: - “2. Before competition of 1 years, a review of the WSHGs performance shall be made by the Collector after which a decision can be taken to either renew [Underlined by us] or rescind the contract”. 9. It is nobody’s case before the learned Single Judge that the issue involved in the writ petition was ‘termination of contract’, rather it is clear case where the entire contract period was exhausted. Thereafter, due to General Elections, Model Code of Conduct was imposed and the existing suppliers like the petitioner- SHG were directed by the letter dated 15.07.2024 (Annexure-3) to continue supply of THR beyond the period of agreement dated 01.06.2023. The reasons for such extension is apparent. ‘THR Chhatua’ supply being part of nutrition programme for children / mothers, it cannot be stopped. The terms and conditions of the agreement at internal page-2 clearly indicates that agreement commenced on 01.04.2023 and was to remain in force till 31.03.2024. W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 Page 7 of 10 In our considered view, beyond 31.03.2024, there cannot be any contract much less, there cannot be any termination by the Collector. 10. We have also considered the contention that whether adequate opportunity of hearing was given and principles of natural justice complied with before the decision to stop supply being made by appellant was taken by the authority. We notice it was contended before and also noted by the learned Single Judge in the order impugned before us that the petitioner was ready to supply the THR for the month of November, 2024. 11. Regarding preparation and supply of THR, the following clause of the contract/ supply agreement is relevant: - “Preparation, Packaging Delivery 01. That, the mixing of Chhatua will be on a fixed day i.e. 23rd day of every month, before the presence of concerned supervisors, in order to maintain right quality & quantity 02. That, he SHG after mixing on 23rd day of every month should deliver the THR (Chhatua) to the concerned AW Centres within 31st day of every month. 03. THR should be prepared by the SHG as per the monthly indent received from the Office of the CDPO i.e. the list of beneficiaries under ICDS. 04. THR should be prepared for a month and packed in specified colour coding packets for the each category of beneficiaries as per guidelines. 05. THR is to be distributed at the AWCs as per the schedule packages and volume specified by W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 Page 8 of 10 the CDPO, once in a month as per a fixed route chart prepared by the SHG. 06. The route chart developed by the SHG should be displayed in the office of the SHG. 07. The name of the SHG must be printed on the packet along with the date of manufacture and the quantity of ingredients mixed and net quantity and also display a message that, it is meant for targeted beneficiaries only.” 12. Concededly, as per agreement and also stated in the writ petition for supply for month of November THR was to be mixed in presence of the concerned supervision on 23.10.2024, and it was to be supplied by 31.10.2024. Mentioning non-supply of THR, show- cause notice was issued on 04.11.2024, the petitioner- SHG has prepared and filed its reply/ response / show- cause by letter dated 05.11.2024 of which English translation is provided before us. In the said show- cause, regarding preparation of THR on 23.10.2024, availability supply is nowhere mentioned. Rather the non-preparation and supply of THR is admitted in the reply of the appellant dated 05.11.2024. 13. The difficulties such as lack of money, non-supply of wheat is mentioned in the show-cause. It is contended that the petitioner wanted to supply as late as on 05.11.2024, if after preparation under supervision on 23.10.2024 and supply date was over on 31.10.2024. We find even on its own showing, the petitioner had not written anything in the show cause furnished regarding preparation of THR if at all it was W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 Page 9 of 10 prepared and after it was prepared, intention of petitioner to supply. We reproduce from the translated show-cause reply: - “It is fervently request you to forgive us for irregular supply of THR Chhatua due to financial crisis, natural calamities like cyclone and flood, electricity power disruption and other genuine difficulties which intentional nor deliberate and allow us to continue preparation and supply of THR Chhatua in future for which the poor and downtrodden members of SHG and their family members shall be grateful to you.” is neither Perusal of the show cause of appellant makes it abundantly clear that it had not prepared ‘THR Chhatua’ as per agreement on 23.10.2025 nor it was ready to supply. Rather, the reasons stated by the appellant makes it clear that for certain reasons it had not prepared ‘THR Chhatua’. 14. In view of the above discussions, we do not find any merit in the writ appeal, the same is accordingly dismissed. The judgment dated 13th November, 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.27865 of 2024 is confirmed. No costs. (Manash Ranjan Pathak) Judge (Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RANJEETA SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 08-Oct-2025 16:45:23 Narayan/Ranjeeta Judge. W.A. No. 3295 of 2024 Page 10 of 10