Madhya Pradesh High Court
Adarsh Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 August, 2012
W.P. No.13010/2012
(Adarsh Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.)
17.08.2012
Shri V. D. S. Chouhan learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Shri Kamlesh Dwivedi learned counsel for the
respondent no.7 on Caveat.
Heard on the question of admission and interim relief.
The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 27.7.2012 passed by respondent no.5 Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Majholi, District Sidhi, whereby it is alleged that the said authority without taking into consideration the order passed by this Court in W.P No.3639/2011 or the previous orders passed by the authorities on 13.1.2012 and 13.3.2012, has passed the impugned order withdrawing certain schools from the contract of the petitioner to supply mid-day meals.
The learned counsel appearing for respondent no.7, on Caveat, per contra submits that the impugned order has been passed in accordance with the policy of the State in view of the fact that in the work allotted to the respondent Caveator had become impossible to pay honorarium to the cook who was preparing the mid-day meals.
Be that as it may, as the matter requires to be examined after going into all questions of facts which are highly disputed and cannot be gone into by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary power under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, therefore, the W.P. No.13010/2012 (Adarsh Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.) petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner approaches the respondent no.3 within fifteen days alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition, the concerned authority shall examine the matter as well as the validity of the impugned order dated 27.7.2012 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Majholi, District Sidhi, and after hearing both the contesting parties, i.e. the petitioner and respondent no.7 and all other concerned parties, take a decision thereon expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months thereafter by passing a reasoned order.
It is made clear that the Collector, Sidhi would also be empowered to make any interim arrangement during the pendency of the matter before him in case the same is so required. He shall also take into consideration the orders passed in the previous proceedings.
With the aforesaid direction, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.
C.C as per rules today.
( R.S. JHA ) JUDGE mms/-