- (1.) M. Katju, J. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 14-1-97 Annexure-1 to the writ petition which has been passed by the State Govern ment under Section 15 (4) of the U. P. Sugar cane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to Act ).
(2.) HEARD Sri Sudhir Chandra learned senior Advocate and Ms. Bharati Sapru for the petitioner, and Sri Vineet Saran for respondent No. 2 as well as learned Stand ing Counsel. None appeared for respondent No. 3 although notice was served personally on it. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is a company registered under Indian Companies Act which has a sugar factory at Mawana in District Meerut known as the Mawana Sugar Works. The dispute in the present case relates to allotment of cane centre Shivpuri to respondent No. 2 under Section 15 (1) of the Act. This cane centre was assigned in the reserved area of the petitioner by order dated 9-11-96 Annexure-3 to the writ petition. But on the appeal of the respondent No. 2 the said order was set aside by the impugned order dated 14-1-97 and the cane centre Shivpuri was assigned to respondent No. 2, hence this writ petition. Sri Sudhir Chandra learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cane centre Shivpuri was originally part of the cane centre Kailashpur in the reserved area of the petitioner for more than 47 years. In 1978 this cane centre Kailashpur was bifur cated into cane centre Kailashpur and cane centre Shivpuri and it is alleged that from 1992-93 cane centre Shivpuri was being as signed to the petitioner as alleged in para-graph-7 of the writ petition.
(3.) SRI Sudhir Chandra learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the years 1993-94,1994-95 and 1995-96 the crushing capacity of the Mawana unit of the petitioner was only 5000 TC. D. per day, but the crushing capacity in 1996-97 has gone up to the 9,000 T. C. D. and hence the petitioner's unit requires more cane. He has stated that the amount of cane, crushed by the petitioner's unit at Mawana has been increasing from 1993-94 to 1995-96 every year. In paragraph-17a of the writ petition it has been stated that in 1994-95 0. 18 lakh quintal was purchased by the petitioner's unit, while in 1995-96 0. 19 lakh quintal was purchased during the period mentioned in para 17a. In para-18 of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioner expressed need of 1. 62 lakh quintal of sugar cane. In para 39 of the writ petition it is stated that in a period of 58 days the petitioner had purchased 0. 22 lakh quintal of Sugar cane from cane centre Shivpuri. In para 42 of the writ petition it is stated that respondent No. 2 has 41 cane centres reserved to it with the crushing capacity of 10,000 T. C. D. while the petitioner has only 90 cane centres reserved to it having crushing capacity 9,000 T. C. D. Sri Sudhir Chandra contended that cane centre Shivpuri is at a distance of only 31 Km. from the petitioner's Mawana unit whereas it is a distance of 37 Km. from the factory of the respondent No. 2 as stated in para-17 of the writ petition. On the basis of these submissions learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Rule 22 of the U. P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Rules, 1954 has been violated by the impugned order. Rule 22 of the said Rule stated as fol lows: "22. In reserving an area for or assigning an area to a factory or determining the quantity of cane to be purchased from an area by a factory, under Section 15, the Cane Commissioner may take into consideration - (a) the distance of the area from the factory, (b) facilities for transport of cane from the area, (c) the quantity of cane supplied from the area to the factory in previous year, (d) previous reservation and assignment or ders, (e) the quantity of cane to be crushed in the factory, (f) the arrangements made by the factory in previous years for payment of (purchase tax) cane price and commission, (g) the views of the Cane-growers' Coopera tive Society of the area, (h) efforts made by the factory is developing the reserved or assigned area ). ";