Dismissed

The Doaba and New Doaba Sanik Asso. v. F.C.India and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Jan 2014CWP/12227/1995

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three writ petitions challenging the Ministry's decision to enhance godown rent filed by the Food Corporation of India and others were disposed of as infructuous. The Ministry of Finance did not accept the proposal, nullifying the departmental decision.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed of as infructuous; costs to be deposited by respondents within 7 days.

The Doaba and New Doaba Sanik Asso. Vs F.C.India and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.12227 of 1995

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

1. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.12227 of 1995

¶5

The Doaba and New Doaba Sainik Associates …..Petitioner

¶6

versus

¶7

The Food Corporation of India and others .....Respondents

¶8

2. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.5682 of 1999

¶9

Sh. D.S. Bahia …..Petitioner

¶10

versus

¶11

Union of India and another .....Respondents

¶12

3. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.10830 of 2001

¶13

Smt. Kulwant Kaur and co-owners and others …..Petitioners

¶14

versus

¶15

Union of India and others .....Respondents

¶16

DATE OF DECISION: 09.01.2014

¶17

CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI

¶18

Present: None for the petitioners.

¶19

Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Assistant Solicitor General for Union of India.

¶20

Mr. D.V. Sharma, Sr. Advocate with

¶21

Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2 in CWP No.5682 of 1999.

¶22

Mr. Arun Walia, Advocate for the respondents in CWP No.12227 of 1995 and for respondent No.2 in CWP No.10830 of 2001.

¶23

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE : (Oral)

¶24

The common question involved in these petitions is the enforcement

¶25

Rani Neetu 2014.01.10 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶26

CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.12227 of 1995

¶27

¶28

of the decision stated to have been taken by the Ministry of Food and Consumer Affairs, Government of India dated 20.05.1998 and 29.07.1998 to enhance the rent charges being paid by the Food Corporation of India to the godown owners.

¶29

A written statement was belatedly filed by the Food Corporation of India stating that the proposal to enhance the rent for the godown was not found acceptable by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India and in view thereof, the decision of the Department of Food stands nullified. The copy of the relevant departmental communication in this regard has been annexed as Annexure R-5 in CWP No.10830 of 2001. The costs imposed for bringing the written statement on record be positively deposited within 7 days.

¶30

The result of the aforesaid is that the cause of action on which, the petitions have been filed does not survive. We leave it open to the petitioners to pursue any other legal remedy, if available, regarding plea of enhancement of godown rent.

¶31

The petitions are disposed of as infructuous.

¶32

A copy of the order be sent to the petitioners in these petitions without process fee.

¶33

List on 17.01.2014 before Registrar (Judicial) to verify cost is paid.

¶34

( SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶35

09.01.2014 ( ARUN PALLI ) neetu JUDGE

¶36

Rani Neetu 2014.01.10 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

The Doaba and New Doaba Sanik Asso. v. F.C.India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Doaba and New Doaba Sanik Asso. v. F.C.India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravinder Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Sunny Electornics Vs Railtel Corporation of India Ltd. and Orsq

Jasjeet Kaur and Ors. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Ram Kunwar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Gm, Haryana Roadways, Rohtak Vs Bhijender Singh & Another

Gm, Haryana Roadways, Rohtak Vs Om Kumar & Anr.