Allowed

M/S Rausheena Udyog Ltd. Thru. Auth. Signatory Shri Kamal Nath Jha v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pushhtahar Vibhag Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2024/6642/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed a show cause notice and an order imposing a penalty on the petitioner for alleged contractual liability violations. The court held that principles of natural justice were violated as the petitioner was not involved in the ex parte enquiry. Writ petition disposed of with liberty to proceed afresh.

What did the court decide?

Impugned show cause notice dated 19.07.2024 and consequential order dated 27.07.2024 set aside; writ petition disposed of with liberty to proceed afresh.

M/S Rausheena Udyog Ltd. Thru. Auth… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:54757-DB

¶2

Court No. - 3

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6642 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- M/S Rausheena Udyog Ltd. Thru. Auth. Signatory Shri Kamal Nath Jha Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pushhtahar Vibhag Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard Sri J.N. Mathur, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Amit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayer:-

¶8

"To issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order date 27.07.2024 passed by respondent no. 3 i.e., Director, Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pushtahar Vibhag, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, in gross violation of natural justice, contained as Annexure No. 1 to this Writ Petition.

¶9

To issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 19.07.2024 passed by respondent no. 3 i.e., Director, Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pushtahar Vibhag, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, in gross violation of natural justice, contained as annexure no. 2 to this writ petition."

¶10

It has been admitted petition at the Bar that similar writ petitions were filed before this Court at Allahabad and some five of them have been decided in terms of order dated 05.08.2024 passed by coordinate Division Bench. Copy of the order passed in Writ C No. 25182 of 2024, Shree Lalji Energy Foods Private Limited Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others and in Writ C No. 25165 of 2024, Chemester Food Industry Private Limited Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others have been produced before this Court by the counsel for the petitioners.

¶11

Challenge has been raised to the show cause notice dated 19.07.2024 and the consequential order dated 27.07.2024 passed by the Director, Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pushtaqhar/respondent no. 2, whereby the respondents have imposed penalty @ Rs. 18,49,22,338.81/- on the petitioner

¶12

against contractual liabilities.

¶13

Submission is, the show cause notice is disclosed to have been preceded by an enquiry in which ex parte report was submitted on 22.04.2024. Neither the petitioner was involved in that enquiry nor the petitioner was served with a copy of the enquiry report nor the petitioner was acquainted with any adverse material referred to either in the show cause notice dated 19.07.2024 or in the impugned order dated 27.07.2024. Acting wholly ex parte and with a premeditated mind, as is disclosed from plain reading of the show cause notice dated 19.07.2024, the impugned order dated 27.07.2024 has been passed imposing a heavy civil liability on the petitioner.

¶14

On merits, it has been submitted that the work was performed by the petitioner wholly in accordance with law. There are no violations or unauthorised deviations.

¶15

We have been informed that the coordinate Bench at Allahabad when apprised of gross violation of principles of natural justice had disposed of the writ petition quashing the impugned notices and giving liberty to the respondents to proceed afresh and pass appropriate orders.

¶16

Accordingly, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the instant writ petition in a similar fashion.

¶17

Consequently, the impugned show cause notice dated 19.07.2024 and the consequential order dated 27.07.2024 are set aside . Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following observations/directions :

¶18

(i) The respondents may issue a fresh and/or supplementary notice to the petitioner within a week from today enclosing thereto copies of all relevant documents on which they may seek to rely.

¶19

(ii) Subject to such service, the petitioner shall have two weeks therefrom to furnish its reply both as to merit and any other objection that the petitioner may raise to the show cause notice.

¶20

(iii) Upon furnishing of such reply, the respondent no. 2 shall fix a date of personal hearing in the matter with at least fifteen days prior notice to the petitioner. Thereupon, petitioner undertakes to appear on the date fixed and not seek adjournment. Thereupon, a fresh and reasoned order may be passed dealing with the objections that the petitioner may raise.

¶21

Needless to add, such order may be passed on de novo basis without being prejudiced by any observation made in the

¶22

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.)

¶23

impugned orders. Order Date :- 8.8.2024 Anurag

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

M/S Rausheena Udyog Ltd. Thru. Auth. Signatory Shri Kamal Nath Jha v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pushhtahar Vibhag Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Rausheena Udyog Ltd. Thru. Auth. Signatory Shri Kamal Nath Jha v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pushhtahar Vibhag Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vishnu Prakash Puspjivi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Vidya Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Urban Development Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

M/S Gyan Ganga Sweet House Thru.Its Prop. Mr Rama Shanker @ Ramashanker Patel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Civil Lko and 3 Others

Ms.Priyanka Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Ors.

Sanjeev Kumar Vs U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. Govt. of U.P. Thru. Its Chairman and Others

Aishwarya Vikaram Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Culture Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko. and 44 Others