Barabandh PACCS Ltd And Ors vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to implead the Jharkhand State Food and Civil Supplies Cooperation Private Limited (in short ‘the

Corporation’), through its General Manager, Ranchi as the respondent No.12 in the present writ petition.

Let necessary insertion in the cause title of the present writ petition be made by learned counsel for the petitioners in course of the day.

The petitioners, who are the PAACS in the district of Godda having been represented either through their Presidents or the Assistant Manager, have

filed the present writ petition for issuance of direction upon the respondent authorities to make proper calculation of the allotted fund and the

expenditure incurred by the petitioners in accordance with the government policy as well as in terms with the agreement entered between them and

the concerned rice mills prior to lodging of any FIR against them as they are ready to refund the amount, if any found due against them, after making

such calculation.

The case of the petitioners is that they were selected for procurement of paddy for Kharif marketing season of the year 2012-13 vide memo No. 136

dated 23.02.2013 issued under the signature of the respondent No.7. As per memo No. 179 dated 16.03.2013 issued under the signature of the

respondent No.7, the petitioners were tagged with different rice mills and accordingly they entered into agreement with the concerned rice mills.

Further case of the petitioners is that they used to procure paddy from the farmers which was to be transported to the concerned rice mills, but the

rice mill owners used to show lesser quantity of the procured paddy while receiving the same. Moreover, the concerned rice mills, after receiving the

procured paddy, either did not prepare the Custom Milled Rice (CMR) or did not send appropriate quantity of the same to the FCI godowns. Under

the said circumstances, the petitioners are facing difficulty in refunding the amount disbursed to them by the Corporation. The petitioners represented

various authorities in this regard, however, the same remained un-responded.

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 & 3, sworn by the General Manager (I/C) of the Corporation stating inter alia

that the Corporation has been nominated as the nodal agency for the purpose of paddy procurement scheme of the government. In order to enable the

PAACS/LAMPS of a district to purchase paddy from the farmers, the necessary fund was made available to them by the Corporation and the

unutilized fund under the said head has been sought to be recovered from the concerned PAACS/LAMPS including the petitioners. It has been further

stated that out of the proceeds received, the PAACS/LAMPS purchased paddy and after milling of the same by the rice mills, some rice were sent to

the godowns of the FCI. After adjusting the price of the CMR sent to the godowns of the FCI, the remaining amount is sought to be recovered. The

petitioners are bound by the agreement entered between them and the rice mills and thus any inability on their part to properly handle the matter of

procurement of paddy cannot be fastened either on the Corporation or the State Government. It has also been stated in the counter affidavit that in

terms with the resolution issued by the State Government with regard to the present scheme, the Committees have been constituted at three levels.

The State level Monitoring Committee is headed by the Development Commissioner, the district level Monitoring Committee is headed by the Deputy

Commissioner of the concerned district and the block level Monitoring Committee is headed by the Block Development Officer of the concerned

block to deal with any issue arising out of the said scheme. However, the petitioners have not made any such complain before the said Committees.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. The petitioners, who are the PAACS functioning within the

district of Godda, have tried to justify that they have properly utilized the fund disbursed to them by the Corporation whereas the stand taken in the

counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 is that the Corporation is duty bound to take measures so as to ensure that the

PAACS/LAMPS have properly utilized the fund disbursed to them for the purpose of procurement of paddy, preparation of the CMR and

transportation of the same to the concerned FCI godowns.

Undoubtedly, any scheme including the present one floated by the Central/State Government is required to be implemented in proper manner as the

same involves huge expenditure for the purpose of social cause. The said scheme has been floated by the Government for the purpose of procurement

of paddy during the Kharif marketing season in order to give an appropriate support price to the farmers. Since the issue regarding the proper

utilization of the fund disbursed by the Corporation at different levels for the said purpose requires factual determination, the writ jurisdiction is not the

appropriate forum for adjudicating the same. Hence, keeping in view the statement made in the counter affidavit that the district level Monitoring

Committee has been constituted under the Chairmanship of the Deputy Commissioner, Godda, the petitioners are given liberty to file fresh

representation(s) before the said Committee on the present issue. On receipt of such representation(s), the said Committee shall take up the matter

and after providing due opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties, shall take appropriate decision preferably within a period of three months

from the date of receipt of the said representation(s). The said Committee is also at liberty to recommend appropriate action against the erring

person(s) in accordance with law.