Disposed

M/S Om Rice Mill v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Jul 2023WRIC/23535/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged blacklisting order and cancellation of character certificate following acquittal in underlying criminal trial. Court disposed petition without merits, granting liberty to file representation for revocation within prescribed time.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file representation before respondent no.2 for revocation of impugned order to be decided within eight weeks.

M/S Om Rice Mill Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:144316-DB

¶2

Court No. - 21

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23535 of 2023 Petitioner :- M/S Om Rice Mill Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Tarun Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.

¶5

The instant petition has been filed challenging an order dated 9.11.2020 passed by District Magistrate, Pilibhit blacklisting the petitioner firm and cancelling the character certificate on the ground that the petitioner had indulged in illegal sale and purchase of paddy from the farmers during the Kharif season 2020-21.

¶6

Sri Tarun Agrawal, counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order was not challenged at that stage because the respondents had also lodged a First Information Report on the same allegations. He points out that on basis of the First Information Report, a trial was conducted in which the petitioner was acquitted by order dated 20.04.2023. It is submitted that after the acquittal of the petitioner, it was advised to challenge the order of blacklisting. Moreover, it is urged that the blacklisting could not be for an indefinite period. He submits that the respondents be directed to examine the claim of the petitioner for revoking the impugned order having regard to the fact that he was acquitted in the criminal trial on 20.04.2023.

¶7

Sri Rajeev Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel very fairly states that in case the petitioner approaches the District Magistrate with any representation, it will be considered in accordance with law.

¶8

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits, the instant petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file representation alongwith true attested copy of the instant order before respondent no.2 praying for revocation of the impugned order and in which event, he will decide the same taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner was acquitted in the criminal trial. The decision will be taken within eight weeks from the date of receipt of representation.

¶9

(Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶10

Order Date :- 20.7.2023 SL

¶11

Digitally signed by :- SHYAM LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

M/S Om Rice Mill v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Om Rice Mill v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tadak Nath Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satya Veer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abhishek Dwivedi Vs Chief Election Officer and Another

Sarthak Chaudhary Vs Union of India and 4 Others

Vaibhav Srivasatava and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Bhanu Pratap Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others