Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA, JAYANT BANERJI
Shiv Shanker Transport – Appellant
Versus
State Of UP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Shri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
2. Challenge in the writ petition to the order dated 06.01.2024, passed by the Regional Food Controller, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur, the third respondent, whereby the contract awarded to the petitioner for transportation and handling has been cancelled. The security money deposited by the petitioner has been forfeited and the petitioners' firm has been black-listed for the period of 05 years.
3. The petitioner no. 1 is a firm which is a Handling/Transportation Contractor, Stage-I, which was engaged by the respondents by means of an agreement dated 01.09.2018 for transporting essential commodities and food- grains from the F.C.I. godown at Arjunha to Ramkola and Nebua Nauragia in District Kushinagar. It is stated that the contract was entered into between the petitioner no. 1- firm and the respondents for the year 2018-19, which extended up till 30.6.2020 in view of the Covid-19 pandemic. Previously, there were three godowns in Ramkola in the regular use of the Civil Supply Department which included a godown known as Ramraj Chaubey Godown (Smt. Vandana Shukla daughter of Ramraj Cha
Contract cancellation under public distribution laws justified by evidence of diversion and black market intent, despite claims of procedural irregularities.
Termination of transport agreements requires clear evidence of malpractices; suspicion alone is insufficient for legal actions.
Justification for issuing the impugned order cannot be permitted to be raised in the counter affidavit.
The authority must provide a reasoned decision based on substantial evidence before imposing penalties; procedural fairness is essential in administrative actions.
The cancellation of a fair-price-shop license is invalid if the authority that conducted the inquiry also decides the merits of the case, violating procedural requirements.
Blacklisting of a contractor's vehicles must be proportionate to the offense; lifetime blacklisting is impermissible and must be limited to a reasonable period.
The procurement of PDS rice from cardholders does not violate the Essential Commodities Act, as it does not interrupt the public distribution system.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
