C.W.P. No.17567 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.17567 of 2010 Date of Decision.19.10.2011 M/s Shree Bala Ji Rice Mills, Tajoke Road, Tapa, District Barnala through its partner Madan Lal .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Vikas Mohan Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Navdeep Sukhna, DAG, Punjab for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Hari Pal Verma, Advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner is a purchaser of the rice mill from its owner M/s Shri Ram Rice Mill. Shri Ram Rice Mill appears to have executed a lease in favour of M/s Ganga Rice Mill. M/s Ganga Rice Mill during the period 2004-05 supplied BRL rice and therefore, became a defaulter when a demand was made for effecting fresh supplies. The petitioner as a purchaser has given an undertaking through affidavit dated 23.08.2006 that they will pay the dues that were found payable by M/s Ganga Rice Mill. On the basis of such affidavit, the Government has issued fresh allotments to the petitioner from the year 2006 and it has continued till in the year 2009 when the Government has refused to favour them with allotments on the ground that M/s Ganga Rice Mill had been a defaulter. C.W.P. No.17567 of 2010 -2- I do not find how there could be any objection to a purchaser from claiming the outstanding and obtain fresh allotments, so long as the purchase itself is not sham and it is not a device by the original defaulter to operate the same rice mill in the name of yet another name later on. There is no reason to suspect the transaction of sale, for they are not in any way related. Having made allotment for three years, there is no new material, which the State has obtained to suspect the transaction of sale by Shri Ram Rice Mill to the petitioner. The petitioner is entitled to fresh allotments and the respondents are directed to make such allotments as per rules and policies. 2. The writ petition is allowed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 19, 2011 Pankaj*