f) ') t. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BSLASPUR. CHHATT!SGARH 'lt**>"~ = i S.R. WRIT PETETiON N0.45 OF 200( PETiTi Nav-Jagriti Mahiia Mahila Manda! Through-Presedent, Smt. Girija Devi, Wi'o- Shri Krishna Kumar. aged about iO years. R/o.Village-Bharda, Tah. & Distt.-Durg (C.G.) Vs. 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary Ministry of Food and Civil Suppty Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Collector-Food, Durs Disfrict-Durg (C.G.) 3. Food Offlcer Department of Food and Civil Suppiies, Durg, Tah., & Distt.-Durg (C.G.) 4. Sub-divisional Officer (Revenue), Durg District-Durg (C.G.) Present: Shri R.K. Gomasta, teamed counsel for the petitioner. Shri Yashwant Singh, learned GA for the State/respondents. (Passed on 13" January, 2008) The CoiSector - Food, Durg, District Durg passed an order authorising as many as 65 Societies to distribufe Essential Commodities through their fair price shops. !n pursuance of the said order, the S.D.0. (Revenue), Durg, the fourth responderrt herein, issued authorization to those Societies by his order dated 14-11-2005. Being aggrieved by the order of $he District Collector as well as S.D.O. Durg, it Is stated, the vwit petition No. 6069/2005 and batch were flled in this Court by some aggrieved Societies. In those vyrrt petitions, this Court on 01-12-2005, •z.- stayed the order of the District Coiiector, Durg as weli as S.D.O. Durg with regard to those Societies out of 65 Societies against which the grievances wwe made in those v/rit petitions and that interim order is stiii in operation. The District Collector, Durg in deference to the Interim order passed by th'is Court and thinking it just and appropriate to stay the order made by him with regard to the remaining Societies a!so, took suo-motu initiative to stey the order wsth regard to the remaining Societies. The resuitent position is that evan the authorization granted in favour of the petitioner- Soclety has been stayed by the District Coilector (Food), Durg vide his order dated 20-12-2005. Being aggrieved by the said order, thss writ petition is flied. (2) Having heard tearned counsei for the parties, I do not think that this is a fit where the Court should step-in under Articte 226 and interfere with the order made by the District Collector, Durg in deference to the interim order passed by this Court on 1-12-2005 in W. P. No. 6069 of 2005 and the bateh. Since th®iegality of ths very notification issusd by tiie District Coiiector is a subject matter ofjudicial review in W.P. No. 6069 of 2005, no exception could be taken So the impugned action of the District Collector staylng the authorization granted in favour or the petitioner- Society. Thewritpetitionis,therefore,dismissed. Nocosts. Sd;- S.R. Nayak Chief Justice Knm^-