- (1.) This petition seeks the quashing of the order dated 30th October, 2006 that has been passed by the Cane Commissioner permitting the willing cane growers from the centres reserved to the petitioner to supply sugarcane to Luxmi Sugar Mill which has been arrayed as respondent no.4.
(2.) We have heard Sri S.D. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3, Sri Yashwant Verma for respondent no.4 and Sri Ravindra Singh for respondent no.5.
(3.) The sole submission of Sri S.D. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order had been passed without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. We fail to understand why the order is being challenged after expiry of more than three months when the period for supplying the sugarcane for crushing purpose is almost over. It is a matter of common knowledge that main sugar supply starts in the first week of November and ends by the end of February. No explanation has been furnished by the petitioner for such an inordinate delay in approaching this Court and it is not the case that the order was not in its knowledge. More so, no application to recall the said order has been filed on the ground that the order could not have passed without giving the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is also surprising that the petitioner in similar situation had challenged the order passed by the Cane Commissioner in favour of another sugar mill by filing the Writ Petition No.7439(M/B) of 2006 which was disposed of by the Lucknow Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 24.11.2006.;