Arati Das vs State Of Odisha And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 465 Ori

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                  W.P.(C) No.33650 of 2022
                   (Through Hybrid mode)

Arati Das                               ....                Petitioner

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


Advocates appeared in this case:

For petitioner           : Mr. S. K. Nayak, Advocate
                           Mr. K. Jena, Advocate
                           Mr. S.S.K. Nayak, Advocate
                           Mr. M. Mohanty, Advocate

For opposite parties     : Ms. S. Pattanayak, AGA



            CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
                       JUDGMENT

13.01.2023

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

He submits, his client represents a Women Self Help Group

(WSHG). Impugned in the writ petition is order dated 17th

November, 2022 passed by the District Social Welfare Officer

(DSWO).

2. Drawing attention to impugned order he submits, there is

reference to show-cause notice dated 24th May, 2022, issued to his

// 2 //

client. There is also mention that his client submitted written

statement, which was forwarded to the Civil Supplies Officer (CSO)

under letter dated 18th June, 2022, to examine and suggest further

action. There is further reference that CSO by letter dated 29th June,

2022 suggested stringent action by way of debarring the WSHG

from paddy procurement operation. As such, his client's reply to the

show-cause notice was apparently not considered and therefore, not

dealt with. He seeks interference with impugned order, for it to be

set aside and quashed.

3. He relies on judgment of the Supreme Court in Mohinder

Singh Gill vs. Chief Election Commissioner, reported in AIR 1978

SC 851, paragraph 8 to submit, impugned order does not disclose

reasons and the omission cannot be supplemented by subsequent

order(s).

4. Ms. Pattanayak, learned advocate, Additional Government

Advocate appears on behalf of State and submits, counter has been

filed. In it stands disclosed letter dated 29th June, 2022 written by the

CSO to DSWO. He submits, said letter says that without physical

arrival of paddy at the Paddy Procurement Center (PCC), petitioner

issued vendor receipts to farmers by eye scanning, on their sweet

WP(C) no.33650 of 2022 // 3 //

will and accordingly shortage of paddy was detected by State squad,

during their visit. Hence, there was direction that the defaulting

WSHGs, including petitioner, must be debarred from paddy

procurement operation henceforth. Accordingly, impugned order

was made. There should not be interference. In reply Mr. Nayak

submits, this letter dated 29th June, 2022, was not made available to

his client.

5. Only ground urged is omission to consider the show-cause

reply in making impugned order. Perused cause shown letter dated

28th May, 2022. It appears, reason given for the absence of paddy, at

the PCC of petitioner, is that due to rainy season, farmers were

issued receipts for paddy stored in their houses. Impugned order says

that the reply was subsequently forwarded to the CSO, to examine

and suggest further action and accordingly the CSO had by letter

dated 29th June, 2022, suggested to take stringent action by way of

debarring petitioner from paddy procurement operation. In the

circumstances, letter dated 29th June, 2022 issued by the CSO

became part of impugned order. Relevant passage from it is

extracted and reproduced below.

WP(C) no.33650 of 2022 // 4 //

"During the paddy procurement operation, the State enforcement squad visited different paddy procuring PACS, GPLFs & WSHGs for verification of procurement process. During its visit to Radhakanta Jew WSHG the squad observed certain irregularities and found shortage of 4566.94 Quintal of paddy. On the basis of the report of the squad the Govt. of Food Supplies and Consumer Welfare Department, Odisha vide letter no.6021, dated 25.04.2022 requested the Collector, Bhadrak to take stringent action against the erring WSHG (Radhakanta Jew WSHG). As per the instruction of the Collector the CSO, Bhadrak was requested vide letter no.2285, dated 02.05.2022 to examine the case & necessary follow up action. As per the suggestion of the CSO, Bhadrak show cause was issued to the petitioner vide letter no.1253, dated 24.05.2022. In reply to the show cause, the petitioner submitted her written statement, which was subsequently forwarded to the CSO, Bhadrak vide Letter No.1427, dated 18.06.2022 to examine & suggest further action. Accordingly, the CSO, Bhadrak vide Letter No.3266, dated 29.06.2022 suggested to take stringent action by way of debarring the said Radhakanta Jew WSHG from paddy procurement operation. The letter was placed before the Collector, Bhadrak and as per the kind order, notification no.1765, dated 01.08.2022 was issued for selection of new WSHG/Federation in respect of Bayabanapur GP under Bhandaripokhari Block."

(emphasis supplied)

WP(C) no.33650 of 2022 // 5 //

6. State has disclosed letter dated 29th June, 2022 issued by the

CSO in its counter, at page 37. Two paragraphs from said letter are

extracted and reproduced below.

"In this connection, show-cause was issued by you to the concerned WSHGs for their irregularities. On adopting various pleas, they have submitted show cause reply which is not at all satisfactory and acceptable. As such, they have violated operational guidelines issued by Govt. in FS & CW Department, Odisha, Bhubaneswar for the KMS 2021-

In this context, it is to say that, without physical arrival of paddy at the PPCs, these WSHGs have issued vendor receipts to farmers by eye-scanning of the farmers on their sweet will and accordingly shortage of paddy was detected by the State Squad during their visit. To ascertain the availability of Paddy, the Squad had also visited to some farmers' houses, but the PPCs officials have failed to establish the availability of paddy at farmers' houses."

(emphasis supplied)

It appears from above extract from said letter dated 29th June, 2022

that reason given in the reply by petitioner was dealt with in stating

that to ascertain availability of paddy, the squad had also visited the

farmers' house but availability of paddy could not be established.

7. Petitioner's contention that her reply to the show-cause was

not considered must fail. This is because said letter dated 29th June,

WP(C) no.33650 of 2022 // 6 //

2022, having been referred in impugned order as aforesaid, becomes

part thereof. Said letter specifically deals with ground taken, of

paddy being stored in farmers' houses, to record that for purpose of

ascertaining, visits were made but it could not be established that the

paddy was there. Furthermore, dispute raised on behalf of petitioner

regarding this finding makes the writ petition not maintainable on

existence of disputed questions of fact.

8. M.S. Gill (supra) has no application simply because, as

aforesaid letter dated 29th June, 2022 issued by the CSO became part

of impugned order. As such, it cannot be said, impugned letter was

sought to justified by said letter dated 29th June, 2022, by

supplementing it.

9. No interference is warranted. The writ petition is dismissed.

(Arindam Sinha) Judge Prasant

WP(C) no.33650 of 2022