Baba Akhandalamani Shg vs State Of Odisha And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 174 Ori

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                WP(C) No.24272 of 2019

                                 (Through Hybrid mode)

            Baba Akhandalamani SHG,                 ....           Petitioner
            Khairpadar

                                   Mr. Prashanta Kumar Nayak, Advocate

                                         -Versus-
            State of Odisha and others              ....    Opposite Parties

                                   Mr. Y.S.P. Babu, Addl. Govt. Advocate

                      CORAM : JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
                                      ORDER

Order No.                            04.01.2023

 06.         1.     Mr. Nayak, learned advocate appears on behalf of

petitioner, a Self Help Group (SHG). By impugned communication dated 15th October, 2019 his client was disengaged from supplying Chhatua. He hands up and relies on 'Revised Guidelines for Implementation of Take Home Ration 2018', circulated by the authority under cover of letter dated 3rd August, 2018. He relies on clause-2 in Part A of operational guidelines. Copy has been served on Mr. Babu, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State. Mr. Nayak also relies on judgment dated 20th February, 2020 of a learned Single Judge in, inter alia, WP(C) no.632 of 2020 (Gayatri Maa SHG, Muribahal, Bolangir v. State) to submit, impugned disengagement is clearly illegal.

2. Mr. Babu submits, opportunity to show cause was given to petitioner. He draws attention to annexure A/5 in the counter to show that notice dated 27th September, 2019 was issued to petitioner to submit show cause within seven days from receipt thereon. Mr. Nayak in reply draws attention to the document disclosed at page-40 in the writ petition. He demonstrates that his client stood mentioned against serial no.19 as 'not recommended'. The document bears signature of District Social Welfare Officer, Kalahandi, as made on 24th September, 2019 and, inter alia, approved by the Collector on 28th September, 2019. He submits, without going into the dispute regarding whether or not the show cause notice was served, it stands demonstrated that it was issued for purpose of the record.

3. It does appear that in context of the document at page 40 in the writ petition bearing approval dated 28th September, 2019 of the Collector, inter alia, on negative recommendation against petitioner, the show case dated, the day before (27th September, 2019) was issued for purpose of the record. In the circumstances, impugned communication dated 15th October, 2019 effecting disengagement of petitioner is set aside and quashed. Opposite party nos.2 and 5 are directed to forthwith cause resumption of engagement of petitioner.

4. The writ petition is disposed of.

(Arindam Sinha) Judge

RKS