III ^% HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR PETiTIONERS W.P.(C) N0.1605/2010 1 M/s. Rudra Paddy Foods, Vitlage Kesla-Kharora, Through its Partner Shri Janmitra Sharma, son of Shri Om Prakash Sharma, aged about 26 years, resident of New Khursipar, Bhilai, Distrtet Durg (CG) 2 Janmitra Sharma, Son of Shri Om Prakash Sharma, aged about 26 years, resident of New Khursipar, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) RESPONDENTS Versus 1 State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Food Civil Supplies & Consumer Protection, Secretariat, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur 2 Food Corporation of India, through its General Manager, Kapa, Raipur 3 The Collector (Food Division), Raipur (CG) 4 The Food Controller, Govt. of Chh^tisgarh, Raipur WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Ms. Sharmila Singhai, Counsel for the petitioners. Mrs.Smita Ghai, Panel Lawyer for State/respondents 1, 3 & 4on advance copy. ORAL ORDER (12.04.2010) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA. J. Heard. the i%s s y / %, '^c^'./ '-:S!%;-^3ii W.P.fCl N0.1605/2010 c Petitioner No.1 is a Rice Miller. Petitioner No.2 is a partner in Petitioner No.l-Firm. The petitioners have filed this petition for the following reliefs: "A. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the relevant records from the respondents pertaining to the case of the petitioner for its kind perusal. B. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent State authorities, particularly respondent No.3 to decide the application of the petitioners for registration in accordance with law within the time frame fix by this Hon'ble Court, in the interest ofjustice. C Cost of the petition may also be awarded." The petitioners, thus, in substance are praying for a direction to the respondents/State, particularty, respondent No.3 to decide the appiication of the petitioners for registration of petitioner No.1- Firm in accordance with the Poiicy of the State Government. Ms. Sharmila Sinhgai, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the application for registration according to the Policy for Rice Milling in the year 2009-10 was filed on 05.11.2009 before respondent No.3, but respondent No.3 has not decided the said application for registration of petitioner No.1 - Firm under the said Policy. She makes a limited prayer that respondent No.3 may be directed to dispose of the application dated 05.11.2009 (Annexure P/8) filed for registration of petitioner No.1- Firm within the stipulated period granted by this Court, so that the matter may come to an end. .. as^ 1 "";sl 1 ^D W.P.(C) N0.1605/2010 shyna This limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners is not opposed by learned counsei for respondents 1, 3 & 4. In view of the above, this petition is finally disposed ofwith a direction that if the application filed by the petltioner on 05.11.2009 before respondent No.3 (Annexure P/8) has not been disposed of so far, respondent No.3 shall try to dispose ofthe same as early as possible preferabiy within a period of 4 weeks from the date of filing of the certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid observation/direction, this petition stands finally disposed of. — — ' Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge