In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CWP No.8463 of 2007 Date of decision:22.5.2008 M/sSubhiksa Trading Services Ltd. ......Petitioner Versus U.T.Chandigarh and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Ms.J.J.Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Sayal,Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 4. **** JUDGMENT M.M.KUMAR, J. The prayer made in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is for quashing of order dated 21.5.2007 (Annexure P-8) passed by respondent No.3-State Agricultural Marketing Board, U.T.Chandigarh. The petitioner-company has started the operation of sale, purchase and storage of agricultural produce including fruits and vegetables etc. On account of the fact that the petitioner-company has not obtained any licence, impugned order dated 21.5.2007 (Annexure P-8) was passed directing it to obtain a licence in respect of each of its outlets in terms of the provisions of Section 10 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961(as applicable to Union Territory, Chandigarh) (for brevity 'the 1961 Act') read with Rule 17(7) of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets (General) Rules 1962 (as applicable to Union Territory, Chandigarh)(for brevity 'the 1962 Rules'). The petitioner- CWP No.8463 of 2007 -2- company has also been saddle with the penalty of Rs.500/- on each of the outlet. It is the admitted position that the petitioner- company has paid the penalty for each of the outlet and has also applied for the licences under Section 10 of the 1961 Act read with Rule 17(7) of the 1962 Rules. In that regard averments have been made in para Nos. 7 and 8 of the writ petition, which have not been in disputed in the corresponding para of the written statement. Mr.Sayal, learned counsel for the respondents, states that once the petitioner-company has submitted the application for issuance of licences pursuant to order dated 21.5.2007 (Annexure P-8), the Administration is prepared to issue licenses for each of its outlets as per the provisions of Section 10 of the 1961 Act read with sub-rule 17(7) of the 1962 Rules. He has further clarified that the petitioner-company has applied for licences in respect of individual outlet and the needful shall be done within a period of 60 days. In view of above statement made by Mr. Sayal, learned counsel for the respondents, the writ petition has been rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such. However, the petitioner- company shall be permitted to continue their sale activities from its outlets till the licences are given to it and after the licences are given, it would be entitled to continue its business as per the Rules. (M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE (SABINA) May 22, 2008 JUDGE anita