CWP No.16218 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C. W. P. No. 16218 of 2009 Date of Decision: 26 - 10 - 2009 Harinder Singh and others ....Petitioners v. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.J.S.Bhandohal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Anil Kumar Sharma, Addl.A.G., Punjab for the respondents. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Mr.Inderdip Singh, Joint Director, Rice Milling, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Punjab is present in Court. He has placed on record a written note signed by the Food and Supplies Officer, Samana and the same read as under:- “In this writ petition the petitioner prays that quota of paddy for milling has not been allotted to him according to their milling capacity as per the policy for kms 2009-10 and paddy is being shifted out to other area arbitrarily. In this regard it is submitted that the prayer of the CWP No.16218 of 2009 [2] petitioner is totally incorrect as the arrival of paddy is going on in the mandi's and the paddy purchased by the Govt. procuring agencies is stored in shellers in equitable proportion as per the provision laid down in the custom milling policy for KMS 2009-10. As per clause 8 K of CMR Policy 2009-10 of the department has fixed a norm for the distribution of paddy equitably from the date of procurement. A quantity of 500 MT for every one ton capacity for the first round shall be allotted and the second round of allotment of paddy will start only when the first round is completed and the mill has completed the mandatory requirements of purchase of paddy in his own account. As per 4 b of KMS 2009-10 surplus paddy is shifted from one district another, one centre to another centre within a district as per the plan approved by Director Food & Supplies. It has further been stated in the same clause that paddy would be allotted to millers subject to its availability with procuring agencies, the shortfall if any, from the paddy allocation to be made without cash security would not be arranged from other district. The right of the miller deemed to have lapsed and the miller shall have no claim against it. Moreover the petitioner no.3 M/s.Sunder Agro Kadrabad as per the office record does not exist and petitioner no.9 M/s.Gurukripa Rice Mill is still defaulter and has not been allotted for KMS 2009-10 and they have no claim for storage/milling of paddy. In view of the above policy position the paddy is being CWP No.16218 of 2009 [3] distributed among the rice millers including petitioners also. The petitioner have not made any request to the respondent no.8 in this regard. In view of the above the claim of the petitioner is baseless and need to be dismissed.” Counsel for the petitioners state that in view of the note provided by the Department, no grievance of the petitioners subsists and the present writ petition be disposed of in terms of the note submitted by the respondent-Department. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the note reproduced above qua all the petitioners except petitioner No.3 and 9. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) October 26, 2009. JUDGE RC