- (1.) ON conclusion of the hearing on 21.1.2011, we had expressed our opinion of allowing the writ petition. The reasons for allowing the same are contained in the judgment and order herein below: Petitioner M/s Allahabad Traders through one of its partner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 15.9.2010 passed by the Regional Food Controller, Allahabad Region, Allahabad cancelling the petitioner's registration with the department and directing it to be placed in the black list.
(2.) THE petitioner is a Contractor registered with the office of the Regional Food Controller, Allahabad Region, Allahabad and is engaged in the business of transport. In the year 2008-2009, the petitioner was entrusted with the transportation of 29693.20 quintal of custom paddy from the Purchase Centre, Manjhanpur for the purpose of hulling to Rakesh Mini Rice Mill (in short 'Mill') situate in Manjhanpur itself. It is alleged that the petitioner performed the above work. On the certificate of satisfactory completion of work issued on 23.5.2009 by the Marketing Inspector, Manjhanpur, the District Food Marketing Officer recommended for payment to the petitioner. The recommendations dated 8.5.2009 were accepted by the Regional Food Controller and vide letter dated 26.6.2009 directions for payment and refund of security furnished for due performance of the said contract were issued. The petitioner was accordingly paid the transportation charges in respect of the above quantity of the custom paddy. It appears that a complaint was made on behalf of the Mill to the effect that it had only received 11,659.05 quintal of custom paddy instead of the allotted quantity of 29,693.20 quintal. The Regional Food Controller, Allahabad on 30.10.2009 passed an order black-listing the petitioner and restraining it from working as a transporter with the department. The enquiry report dated 3.9.2009 was made the sole basis for passing the aforesaid order. The said order of black-listing dated 30.10.2009 was assailed by the petitioner by filing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 60643 of 2009. The writ petition was allowed vide judgment and order dated 30.11.2009 and the order impugned was quashed with liberty to the authorities to proceed in accordance with law and to pass appropriate order after affording fullest opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as the same was found to have been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued a show-cause notice dated 4.12.2009 in connection with the short supply of custom paddy to the Mill. The said show-cause notice was replied by the petitioner on 14.12.2009 and it was contended that the entire consignment of the paddy was duly transported and delivered to the Mill, the delivery of which stands proved by the TCDCs on record. Thereafter a fresh order of black-listing was passed on 22.12.2009. This order was again challenged by the petitioner by filing Writ Petition No. 1148 of 2010. The said writ petition was allowed on 19,7.2010 and this order was also quashed with the direction to the authorities to pass a fresh order as neither full opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner nor there was proper application of mind in passing the same.
(3.) THE impugned order in the present writ petition, which was passed on 15.9.2010 against the petitioner is the third order in succession to the same effect. It may be pertinent to mention that before passing the impugned order the petitioner was again given a show-cause notice dated 3.8.2010 to which a reply was filed by it on 27.8.2010. Necessary pleadings between the parties have been exchanged and they agree for final disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage.;