Dharam Das Lilhare vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3177 MP

                                     1
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                  BEFORE
                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY DWIVEDI
                           ON THE 7th OF MARCH, 2022

                       WRIT PETITION No. 4840 of 2022

           Between:-
           DHARAM DAS LILHARE S/O BALRAM LILHARE ,
           AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SALESMAN
           VILLAGE AND POST KULPA, TEH.LAAJI (MADHYA
           PRADESH)

                                                                     .....PETITIONER
           (BY MR. ANIL LALA, ADVOCATE )

           AND

1.         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
           SECRETARY COOPERATIVE DEPTT VALLABH
           BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.         SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER(REVENUE) REVENUE
           D E PA R T M E N T LAAJI DISTRICT-BALAGHAT
           (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.         SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT KARANJA,
           THROUGH THE BOARD OF DIRECTOR KARANJA,
           DISTRICT-BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                  .....RESPONDENTS
           (BY MR. MANAS MANI VERMA, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

      T h is petition coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed the
following:
                                      ORDER

By the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 17.02.2022 (Annexure-P/1) to the extent that the Sub Divisional Officer, Lanjhi, Balaghat has directed to remove him from service.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner at the relevant point of time, the petitioner was working on the post of Salesman as he was the employee of the Cooperative Society. He submits that the Sub Divisional Officer has no authority and even right under the M.P. Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015, to remove the petitioner from service. He submits that the impugned order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer is without any competence. In support of his contention, he has relied upon judgments passed by this Court in

W.P. Nos.11751/2020 and 1504/2020.

Considering the aforesaid, I am of the opinion that the impugned order dated 17.02.2022 (Annexure-P/1) is apparently without any jurisdiction, therefore, it is hereby set-aside. However, the respondents/State is granted liberty to act in

accordance with the provisions of M.P. Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015. The Sub Divisional Officer at the most can direct the Appointing Authority or the Manager of the Cooperative Society to take appropriate action against the petitioner. However, it is expected from the authorities that before taking any action against the petitioner, they will provide an opportunity of hearing to him if that is the requirement of provision of M.P. Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2015.

With the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE Devashish

DEVASHISH MISHRA 2022.03.08 10:25:18 +05'30'