ORDER: Aggrieved by the order of the third respondent dated 28.11.2001, appointing respondents 4 to 6 as Tea Brokers in respect of tea factories of TANTEA, the petitioners have filed the above writ petitions to quash the said order on various grounds.

2. The case of the petitioner in W.P. No.24289 of 2001 is briefly stated hereunder: According to them, their company was established in 1984 by orders of the first respondent in G.O.Ms.No.338, dated 4.4.1986 and G.O.Ms.No.1107, dated 23.10.1987. The sole objective in formation of the petitioner company was to provide the second respondent, public undertaking with specialized tea broking services. Further, the petitioner was assured by the first respondent that fair amounts of teas will be given to the petitioner for the purpose of broking. The petitioner company therefore was specially formed with technical experts, skilled personnel and consultants only to provide the second respondent with necessary expertise and effective service in broking its teas. The first respondent appointed the petitioner as brokers for the second respondent as the latter is totally controlled by the first respondent. The second respondent has drawn up a lis

Click Here to Read the rest of this document