IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 16307of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: FEBRUARY 16, 2011 M/s A.K. Rice Mills, Amloh & others .....Petitioners VERSUS Union of India & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Ms. Monika Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Sumeet Abrol, AAG, Punjab for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioners pray for direction to quash the notice of recovery (Annexure P-2). The petitioners are Rice Millers and were required to deliver Government milled rice at local depot of FCI at Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. It is stated that the Area Manager FCI asked the rice miller at Amloh to deliver the milled rice at Gobindgarh centre, which is rail head depot. The petitioners showed their inability initially. Being under time constrain to deliver milled rice within time, the petitioners succumbed to the pressure of the Area Manager to give an undertaking to deposit expenses Civil Writ Petition No. 16307of 2009 -2- incurred for transferring milled rice from Amloh to Gobindgarh, which is rail head centre. The petitioners statedly have given this undertaking under pressure. The petitioners have impugned this recovery being against sanctity of law. The notice issued has, accordingly, been impugned. Reply was filed basically to say that on the basis of undertaking the petitioners now cannot ask for change of position. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the time of arguments submits that the petitioners would file representation, which may be considered and decided by the respondents in accordance with law. The counsel further submits that the petitioners, thereafter, would take appropriate action against any adverse order, if passed, in accordance with law. Prayer made by the counsel for the petitioners is fair and accepted. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file the representation, which shall be considered and decided by the respondents in accordance with law. The petitioners would also be at liberty to take any appropriate proceedings against the order passed on the representation. February 16, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) monika JUDGE