WP(C) 1752/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE ANIMA HAZARIKA Heard Mr. B K Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr . S N Sarma, learned Senior counsel, assisted by Mr. A Zahir, Advocate, for the respondents. Considering the grievance raised in the writ petition and as agreed to b y the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at the motion stage itself. Petitioner’s case in brief is that he is a businessman and has a tank tr uck for transporting petroleum on rent. By an agreement dated 19.03.2007, the pe titioner provided the Indian Oil Company Ltd. with one Tank Truck for transporti ng petroleum products as per rates details in work order or letter of intent. Th e petitioner’s truck carried Short Run Naptha (SRN) from Guwahati Refinery to Di gboi Refinery Vide Challan No.93181898 dated 03.12.2008. On reaching Digboi, the tank truck was tested by Quality Control Department of Indian Oil Corporation a nd found that the product was contaminated which was pilfered and replaced with water by Tank Truck Crew. The Corporation thereafter issued show cause notice up on the petitioner on 08.12.2008 to which the petitioner replied on 17.12.2008 de nying the allegation and further stated that the test report of the contaminated product has not been furnished either to the petitioner or to his crew. But wit hout considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner and without followi ng the procedure laid down in Clause IV of the Transport Discipline Guidelines e nclosed with Notice Inviting Tender the authority of the Corporation has issued the impugned letter on 16.12.2009 blacklisting the petitioner’s tank truck along with its crew for two years with effect from 05.12.2008 on the allegation of sh ort receipt of product. The petitioner contended that the show cause letter date d 08.12.2008 was served upon the petitioner on the allegation of contamination b ut impugned action has been taken vide communication dated 16.02.2009 on the all egation of short receipt of the product. Hence the petitioner is before this Cou rt praying for a direction to the respondent corporation to consider his case by allowing him to continue the transportation in terms of the agreement dated 19. 03.2007. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has filed a representation before the authority on 26.03.2009 (Annexure G to th e writ petition) but the same has not been disposed of till date. Therefore, a l imited prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner that a direction may be issued to the authority to dispose of the representation dated 26.03.2009 within a time frame. In view of the limited prayer so made, the respondent No.2 is directed t o dispose of the representation within a period of four weeks form today with a speaking order and the order so passed on the representation be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. The petitioner shall submit before the authority a cer tified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition with the annexu res appended thereto for doing the needful. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.