Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 632 (ORI)

Astha Federation v. State of Orissa

2015-11-18

S.C.PARIJA

body2015
ORDER : S.C. Parija, J. W.P.(C) No. 15324 of 2015 & Misc. Case No. 14724 of 2015 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed challenging the action of the Collector, Balasore, in selecting opposite party Nos. 5 and 6 for preparation and distribution of THR (Chhatual), for a period of three months i.e. from 01.9.2015 to 30.11.2015, as per Annexure-5. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Self Help Organization, engaged in preparation and distribution of RTE (Chhatua) for 22 Gram Panchayats of Basta ICDS. Project in the district of Baiasore since 2011-12. As the performance of the petitioner was found to be satisfactory, the engagement of the petitioner for preparation and distribution of RTE (Chhatua) for the said 22 Gram Panchayats was continued for the subsequent financial years. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that in the proceeding of the Selection Committee meeting held on 17.8.2015, for the selection of Self Help Groups/Federations for preparation and distribution of THR (Chhatua) for the year 2015-16, though the petitioner Federation was found to be qualified for renewal of their engagement, the Collector, Balasore, vide his order dated 19.8.2015, curtailed the quota of the present petitioner and selected opposite party Nos. 5 and 6 for preparation and supply of THR (Chhatua), in respect of 7 and 6 Gram Panchayats/Wards respectively, under the Basta ICDS Project. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that though there was no adverse remark with regard to the performance of the petitioner Federation for preparation and distribution of THR (Chhatua), their quota has been curtailed and/or reduced and the same has been allotted in favour of opposite party Nos. 5 and 6 in gross disregard of the notification of the Women & Child Development Department, dated 08.06.2012. It is the further case of the petitioner that such curtailment, reduction of the petitioner's quota has been restored to without affording them an opportunity of hearing. 5. 5 and 6 in gross disregard of the notification of the Women & Child Development Department, dated 08.06.2012. It is the further case of the petitioner that such curtailment, reduction of the petitioner's quota has been restored to without affording them an opportunity of hearing. 5. Learned Counsel for the State with reference to the counter affidavit submits that there were complaints with regard to the preparation and supply of THR (Chhatua) by the petitioner Federation and after taking into consideration different reports and feasibility of the distribution and supply of THR (Chhatua), the authority have decided to engage two new SHGs to ensure uniformity in the process of distribution and supply of THR (Chhatua) in the entire Block. It is further submitted that as the selection of opposite party Nos. 5 and 6 is only for the period of three months, which is going to expire on 30.11.2015, no interference is warranted at this stage. 6. On a perusal of the notification of the State Government in the Women & Child Development Department, dated 08.06.2012, it is seen that reports were received by the said Department that certain districts were taking steps to replace the existing SHGs involved in the process and distribution of THR (Chhatua) with new ones, without any concrete reasons. Accordingly, the State Government in its said notification reiterated the guidelines that at the end of one year, a review of the SHGs performance should be made by the Collector, after which, a decision is to be taken to either renew or rescind the contract. Unless a particular SHG is found to have been supplying substandard chhatua or not confirming as per the Government guidelines of Chhatua processing, there is no need to replace that SHG. The said notification further provides that in case it is necessary to replace an SHG, a thorough verification of the performance of the SHG should be done and approved at the district level and systematically replacing the existing SHGs with new SHGs without any concrete reason, would impact the SNP programme negatively. 7. In the present case, from the proceedings of the Selection Committee meeting held on 17.8.2015, it is seen that the performance of the petitioner SHG has been found to be satisfactory, for which their engagement for preparation and supply of THR (Chhatua) has been continued. 7. In the present case, from the proceedings of the Selection Committee meeting held on 17.8.2015, it is seen that the performance of the petitioner SHG has been found to be satisfactory, for which their engagement for preparation and supply of THR (Chhatua) has been continued. However, their quota has been reduced/curtailed in respect of 13 Gram Panchayats/Wards, which has been allotted to opposite party Nos. 5 and 6, without any justifiable reason. The said proceeding also reveals that there are adverse remarks against the opposite party No. 5 and 6, which appears to have been overlooked and/or ignored, while selecting them for preparation and distribution of THR (Chhatua) for 7 and 6 Gram Panchayats/Wards respectively, which does not appear to be proper and justified. Further, such selection of opposite party Nos. 5 and 6 for a period of three months is contrary to the Government guidelines as detailed above. 8. For the reasons as aforestated, the impugned order of Collector, Balasore, dated 19.8.2015, under Annexure-5, is hereby quashed. 9. The Collector, Balasore, is directed to consider the matter afresh, strictly in terms of the Government notification dated 08.06.2012 and the prescribed guidelines and take a decision in accordance with law, keeping in view the interest of the ultimate consumer. 10. Writ petition and Misc. Case are accordingly disposed of. 11. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules. Free copy of this order be handed over to the learned Counsel for the State for compliance. Disposed off