- (1.) In all the writ petitions a common issue is involved and therefore, with the consent of the parties, all the writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, W.P.(C) No. 3629 of 2014 [Deoghar Mill (Deoghar Rice Mill) Jhausagarhi, Deoghar through its Managing Patner & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors.] is being referred to in the present order.
(2.) Challenging orders dated 20.06.2014, 27.06.2014, 02.07.2014 and 12.07.2014 it is submitted that the respondentDeputy Commissioner was directed to take steps to recover a sum @ Rs. 1298.05 per quintal from the Rice Mill Owners and therefore, the petitioners, apprehending coercive action against them have approached this Court.
(3.) Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the impugned letters dated 20.06.2014, 27.06.2014, 02.07.2014 and 12.07.2014 are without jurisdiction inasmuch as, there is no privy of contract between the petitioners and the authority, which has issued the impugned letters. No agreement was signed between the petitioners and the Government of Jharkhand. It is further submitted that without adjudicating the delay and default on the part of the parties to the contract, the impugned letters could not have been issued by the respondentauthority directing the Deputy Commissioner to realise an amount @ Rs. 1298.05 per quintal from the Rice Mill Owners. It is submitted that the amount so arrived at by the respondentauthority includes actual cost that is, Rs. 1250.00 per quintal of paddy and market fee, handling charges, transportation and other administrative charges which, the respondentauthority cannot decide on their own. Referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "J.G. Engineer (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors., 2011 5 SCC 758" and "State of Karnataka Vs. Shree Rameshwara Rice Mills, Thirthahalli, 1987 2 SCC 160", the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the State being a party to the dispute is not competent to decide the amount of damages. It is further submitted that it is a matter of record that though the paddy was milled by the Rice Mill Owners in time however, due to difficulties faced by the Food Corporation of India (FCI), the rice could not be transported in the godowns of the Food Corporation of India (FCI). It is submitted that in course of delay the petitioners have also suffered huge losses on account of deterioration of paddy/rice. It is further submitted that the impugned orders have been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and since coercive action for realising the amount from the petitioners is contemplated, the petitioners were constrained to approach this Court. Due to impugned orders since adverse civil consequence would follow, the petitioners were entitled for a fair opportunity to put their case before an adverse order is passed against the petitioners.;