LAWS(CHH)-2021-12-34

BHARAT CHANDRAWANSHI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On December 15, 2021
Bharat Chandrawanshi Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on admission as well as on I.A. No.1 - Application for grant of interim relief.

(2.) It is submitted by learned Counsel for Petitioner that the Petitioner had been working as an In-charge of the Paddy Procurement Centre, Kumhi, which is under the control of the Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Kumhi, having registration No.1739 during the Kharif Marketing Year 2020-2021. In the Paddy Season 2020-2021, the Paddy Procurement Centre had made a purchase of 28014.80 quintal of Paddy between 01/12/2020 to 31/01/2021. According to the Clause 2.6 and 2.7 of the Agreement, all the Paddy purchased was to be lifted by the Respondents No.3 and 5 before 31/03/2021 but the concerned Respondents neither lifted the paddy nor issued any Transport Order or Delivery Order to the Petitioner for the same. The Paddy was kept stocked in open. Losses have been suffered because of the natural causes in the rainy season, which is the reason for the shortage of Paddy. The Respondent No.6 has issued a Notice dtd. 9.11.2021 (Annexure P-1) wherein it is mentioned that there is a shortage of 6255.19 quintal of Paddy having value of Rs.15637975.00 and there is a shortage of 30996 Bardana value d to Rs.993384.40. The said notice has been issued to the Petitioner in personal capacity holding him responsible for the loss occurred and he has been directed to deposit the amount, mentioning the consequences of non-deposit of the amount.

(3.) It is further submitted by learned Counsel for Petitioner that the action initiated against the Petitioner is misconceived and against the provisions of the Contract itself. Clause 5.6 of the Agreement provides that in case of any shortage the same shall be recovered from the Samiti. Therefore, the Petitioner should not have been held personally responsible for the shortage. Further, Clause 14 of the Agreement provides for an arbitration clause. Therefore, issuance of notice before any resolution through arbitration is itself illegal and arbitrary and hence the Petitioner may be protected and relief may be granted.