1 1 260 cs 1 9e CWPN0 1911of2010etce INTHE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION 4A2011 JlCWP Noe1911of2010 Mls Parkash Rice Mill OeePetitioner Versus StateofHaryanaand others 1 tr eRespondents 0 C0 P Noe3554of2010 I Mls Hanuman Rice Mill S Another C5 Jetitioners I Versus Z The StateofHaryanaand others 2 Respondents Q I WP Noe5281 of2010 CJ Mls Inder SinghAjit Singh Z eea Petitioner 00 Versus vm StateofHaryanaand others Z Qm vlWP Noe5282of2010 Mls GanpatiRice Overseas 4eeee eeePetitioner Versus State of Haryanaand others Respondents 9 0 4 r Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 261 rC2 kle 2 CWPNo 1911of2010etce Mls AnnapurnaOverseas eeePetitioner Versus StateofHaryanaand others WP N05279 of 2010 Mls Jhandu Mal Tara Chand eeePetitioner V8rsus m 0 StateofHaryanaand others 0 0 Respondents I of2010 C Mls HaryanaRice Lande I eeePetitioner Z Versus StateofHaryanaand others r I C WP No5287 of2010 Z Mls Shiva Shiva TradingCompany 00 OeePetitioner e4 emo Versus Z Stateof Haryanaand others ll Mls Siri Ganesh Rice and General Mill 4e Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others eRespondents t of2010 J Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 262 5 C CWPNo 1911of2010etce 3 MjsJai DurgaRice and General Mill eeePetitioner Versus The StateofHaryanaand others Mls Hindustan Rice Mills eeePetitioner Versus 1 C4 The StateofHaryanaand others 0 CAO I J2CWP Noe4917of2010 C5 Mls Krishna Rice S General Mills I eeePetitioner Z Versus StateofHaryanaand others C I Z Mls Raj ShreeRice Mills r10 eePetitioner 7 Versus Z State ofHaryanaand others Cl NoS286 of2010 Mls Mahavir Rice G General Mills C OeePetitioner Versus State ofHaryanaand others eeRespondents Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 263 t CWP Noe 1911of2010 etc 4 Mls Hanuman Rice Mills eeePetitioner Versus StateofHaryanaand others Respondents CWP N004937of2010 Mls A One Riee Unit OeePetitioner Versus 1 Ct StateofHaryanaand others 0 0 I C5 CORAM I Z HONBLE MRJUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI r PRESENT2 MrTS DhindsaAdvocate MrOP GoyalSrAdvocatewith I MsRimplejeetKaur Advocate C Mrl0Sharma DAG Haryana Z MrHari Pal Verma Advocate MrGirish AgnihotriSrAdvocatewith m MrArvind Seth Advocate MrKS Dadwal Advocate en Z Permod Kohli Je With similarityof factsand common issues havingbeeninvolved 111 these writ petitionsthe same are beingdisposedofby this common order The petitionersin all thesepetitionsare Millers engagedln custom 4 millingof the paddypursuantto entered into with the HaryanaState CooperativeSupplyand MarketingFederation Limited ohereinafler referred to as the HAFED Even thoughthere are separate impugnednotices 111 all these petitions however the contents being Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 264 C 5 CWPNoe 1911of2010etce t factsare beingnoticedfromCWP No191 1 of2010 StateofHaryanaissued rice levyorder called as Rice Procurement 6Levy9Order 1985 refened to as 1985 orderoThis order has beenissuedunderSection3 of the Essential Act 1955with theobjectiveofmaintaining thesupplyofrice and for securingits distribution d availabilityat fair prices Clause10 of theaforesaid 1985order empowersthe Govemmentor the 1 Food andSupplies to directany ricemiller to convert any stock or r paddyinto nce held by the govemment or its agency or the Food 0 C0 ofIndia on such terms andconditionsas maybe by I theGovemment or the Director In terms ofthe aforesaidClauseofthe 1985 C5 I Orderthe StateofHaryanadecidedto engage various rice mills in the State Z of Haryanafor Custom Millingof Rice commonlyknown as CN A detailed were formulatedin this regardon 19 2008 C issuedbythe Director Food and SuppliesHaryanaUnder the 1985Order I and the the miller is required to deliver the rice after Z custommillingto the FCI Allotment to the millers is to be madebythe OO DistrictLevel Committeeheaded bythe DeputyDirector and comprising of 3 Z District Managerof procurementagenciesincludingthe Food Corporation ofIndia It also provides not to make any allotment to a defaulterrice miller Clause 5 6O of the oolicy 6AnnexureP4 providesfor execution of whereas Clause 09deals with the paymentof millingcharges 4 For the paddyseason 20082009 the petitionernamelyMls Parkash Rice ShivpuriRoad Karnal was entrusted with 1439 MT tonns paddyfor millingA formal agreementenvisagedunder Clause S Oofthe policyalso came to be executed on 2692008 Condition 15 O of the agreeinent 1t Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 265 4 V 6 CWPNo 1911of2010etCe 1 1 for of the rice after as per quality laid down bytheAFEDdirectly to the FCI ConditiOn17Of the deals with themodeand manner of deliveryThe said is as underl 17Fhe of rice shall be deemedto have been bytheMillerlSecondPartyafterthestocksare loadedinto or deliv6redinto the godowns as per of the ofOcial of the 1 C First afler necessary and 0 0 of the quanUtYin accordancewith the I procedure of the First Partyat the cost of the C I PartyIt will be the of the Z MillerlSecond Panyto supplyA note weightcheck andall otherrelevantdocumentsto the concerned memo CC aller the deliveryofrice for claiming I r from Food of India failingwhich Z he shall be liable to pay CCL rate of interest for the Ol period All the expenditureincludinglabour 3 Z loadingunloading and any other Clm etc incurredin connectionwith the delivery of rice within 8 Kms shall be borne by the MilIerlSecond Party1 case rice 1S deliveredbeyond8 Kms the incurred by the MillerlSecond 4ee Party on this account shall be regulatedas per instructions ofGovernmentofIndia 73 Even FCI has issuedguidelines dated 1792008 regardinginspection n 4 n le Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 266 1 r7 44 7 e CWPNoe 1911of2010etc sampleanalysis 111 of the of paddyand ofrice stockduringKharifMarketing Seasons200809 Perusalofthis documentrevealsthat proper has been for ensuringthe of the rice its supplyand storageetc The quality hasto be maintainedasper theguidelines bythe Government of Indiaetc It is admittedcase of thepartiesthat the petitioner deliveredthe milled rice to FCI upto the months 2009 It is alleged thatat the time of FCI Kamal camed out detailedanalysis to m C4 test the quality of the rice delivered by the 0 C0 The petitionerhasplacedon recordvarious I C5 reportsin of the suppliesmade by the petitionerThese are I markedas Annexure P7 with the writ petitionThe acceptance Z indicatethat the milled rice suppIiedconformsto the prescribed as regards thequalityofthe rice supplied r ln the next paddyseason 20092010 againthe partiesenteredinto I C1 same kind of arrangement as in the previousSeason 200809 The Z was entrustedwith 4390MT ofpaddyfor millingfor the season 11 200910 After millingthe rice was to be deliveredto FCI not Iaterthan 7 Z 312010 for which followingschedule of deIiverywas prescribed under Om theagreementexecutedbetweenthepartiesfor this season as well October andNovember 20091 20Io ofthe allotted paddy December 2009 25IdOm V January2010 25Ido February 2010 15Io edo March 2010 1510 d0 95 The milled rice was to be delivered to the FCI directlyin accordance Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 267 8 cwP No 1911of2010 etce l withthe contractual in tenns of the agreementdated 1 10009 The claims to havemilled 184 MT of paddyfor the monthsof 2009andwhendelivery was sought to be madeto FCI it refused to take the It is statedthat when the petitioner made the reason for refusal of the FCI to take deliveryit enqulrles receivedletter dated 10 11009 4nnexure P8I issued by the Pawan GuptaDepot Manager FCI Kamal wherebythe petitionerWas m communicatedthat the rice stocked by lt at Dl3lll Bajidahad been l declaredas Below RejectionLimit lereinafterrefened to as BR It 0 0 was 8lrthercommunicatedthatas a precondition thepetitioneris required I C5 to replace therice at its own costs as per directions of thehigherauthority I for acceptingthe paddyfor the year 200C 10 A similar letter dated Z 271 1 2009 was received from the District A4anagerHAFED Kamal 2 Annexure P4O askingthe petitioner to replacethe BRL stock of rice L I within the specications as per directions of the FCI The petitioner received yet anotherletter dated 4 122009 from the Assistant Food and Z Supplies Officer Kamal on thesame lines adviSing thepetitioner to replace m the BRL declared rice for the year 20089 to facilitate the deliveryof the 7 Z nce pertainingto the paddyseason 2009 10 The petitionermade a Ll dated 21122009 objectingto the demand of the FCI HAFED and Food and Supplies with the pleathat the delivery of rice for thepreviousyear 200809 was as per the agreementand quality 4ev specificationsand norms Petitioner insisted for takingdeliveryofthe rice for the season 200910 The petitioner has been served with the impugned notice dated 81 2010 6Annexure1lI issued bythe Area Manageraskingit to replacethe substandardstocks with stock olf applicablespecifications for Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 268 7 4 9 CWPNo 1911of2010 etce 200809 within seven daysfailingwhichthe reserves season therightto disposeof substandard rice stockdeliveredbythepetitioner at its risk andcosts without lrther noticeand without prejudice to thelegal includingbanningthe business dealingand to the State Government for This letter Annexure P was followedby anothernoticedated 15 2010 issuedby the HAFED P advisingthe to replaceBRL rice 6AnnexurePw2 Both these letters are subJectmatter of m r in the presentpetitionThe submitteda detailedreply 0 0 dated252010 64nnexure P3 to theFCI and HAFED I Challenge to theseordersis primarily on followinggrounds C5 I OThe are not entitled to raise dispute ltl respectof the Z for the season 2008e09 at the time of deliveryof rice for the O4e 2 season2009010 as both thetransactionsare distinctandarise out different r agreements I 6iilDeliverymade duringthe season 200809 was duly acceptedas Z to the prescribedspecifications and standardswithout anv CQ objection andthus no dispute itsqualityand could 7 Z be raisedin the next season 0m iiOTestsconducted allegedlyin respectof deliveryfor the vear 200809 were at the back ofthe petitionerand without even infonningthe petitioner Ov9Freshinspectionhas been carried out alter periodof more than six months of the deliverywhen the nce suppliedto the FCI was stacked and eoeee left out to the vagariesof weather v There has been violation of principlesofnatural justice There are threesets of repliesflled by the The replies 1 10 Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 269 e 7 10 1a CWPNoe 1911of2010etce filed b the FCI and the HAFED do not dispute the facts statedby the RavinderMalik District Food and SuppliesController Karnal hasstatedthatthe miller was to deliver 67Io rice of the paddyduringthe 200809 after millingto the FCI within the period e crop upto3132009 This delivery was made as per the terms and conditionsof theagreementand milling of the petitionerhad been refunded byDistrict ManagerHAFED However no has the rice deliveredbythepetitioner aftereightmonthsand relsed to C the furtherrice ofcropyear 20094 0 vide letterdated101 12009 0 0 In the replyfiled by noA and 56FCO their action is I t5 sought to be justifiedon the groundthat rice suppliedby the petitioner I duringthe season 200809 was found to be substandard e Below Z Limit againstthe laid down for the relevantyear It 2 1S further mentioned that a super inspection was carriedout by Shri Janak Raj AGM QCI FCI Zonal Office North Noida and the analysisrepons I dated 23102009 to 28102009 64nnexuresR511A R511B Rll Cl Z showsthat the stocks deliveredbythepetitioner were below the Iaiddown Cll norms BRL and the petitioner was required to replacethe same for WAO Z which sufficient opportunitywas grantedto the petitionerIt is further Ll allegedthat merelybecause stocks were acceptedby the FCI petitioner cannot be absolved of its liability It 1S stated that in fact petitioner succeeded in delivering the Below RejectionLimit stocks in connlvance CV with the officials ofthe CorporationIt is irthermentionedthat ofcials of CorporationnamelyShri KCGarg Area ManagerSP Dubey AGM 6QCISlNGaba Managerand RajeshChaudharyTechnical Assistant were placedunder suspension and chargeleetedSomeofthem have even been Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document r 270 1 l r 11 4 114e CWPNo 1911of2010etce ofthe FCl According to noA and5 216 relievedfrom MT rice deliveredbythe during theperlodfrom 122009 to 532009 was found to be BelowRejection Limit causingloss to the Corporatton to thetune ofRsA6A8 lacs It is mentionedthatthepetitioner was affordedan to the substandardnce The allegations were not onlyagainst thepetitionerbut alsoagainst numberof othermiilers It is furthermentionedthat the offer of theCorporation was 1 by about 31 millers who replaced the substandardrice supplied r the season 200809 but the failed to do so 0 0 havealso thattherelS an arbitration clausebeingClauseNol3 in I C5 the agreemntenteredbetweenthe and respondent no6 which I inter alia for settlementof all disputesby referringto the sole Z arbitration of the Director Food and Supplies Director 2 of the Agencyor any person by them in this behalf The tr havethuschallenged the ofthe writ petition I The petitionerhas Sled replicationreiterating its stand in the writ Z petitionThe additional fact stated in the replicationis that even as per CQ reportthe infractionin the is inequitable It is V Z furtherpleadedthat the allegedsuper inspectionwas carried out after a periodof more than SlX monthsand withoutany noticeto thepetitioner Or associatingit with such inspection I have heard learned counsel for the partiesat lengthand carefully ee gonethroughthe record Duringthe pendencyof this petitionsome interim orders were passedaskingthe FCI to acceptthe stocks ofrice for the season 20092010 and pay 500Ioofthe billingchargesDetailed interim order in this regardwas Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 271 7 12 444 CWPNo 1911of2010 etc passedonApril9 2010 This orderpassedin CWP Nol91 1 of 2010 was extended to all thewrit petitIons Issuesinvolved lll this petition are two foldsl O supplyof rice for the season 2009 iilSupplyof custom millingof ricefor the season 20092010 both the transactionswere underdistinct and separate executedbetweenthepartiesgoveming the custom millingof 1 for conversionto rice in accordancewith thecontractualstipulations r and the Schemeformulatedunderthe 1985Order It is common case ofthe 0 Co thatall supplies were accepted bytheFCI Oom the petitioner for the I 0 season200809 withoutany objection in respectof quality I mode and manner of deliveryetc as under the Z Not onlythat the rice was acceptedeven were made 2 to thepetitionerand their securitydepositreleased by the HAFED with the concurrence ofFCI Even FCI in its detailedcounter did I not dispute the deliveryof rice and the releaseof paymentsand security Z without any objectionThe case projectedby the FCI 1S that super C11 inspection was carried out by the ofEcials of the FCI wherein the rice m7 Z suppliedby the petitioner was found substandardie Below Rejection 0m Limit BRLI This inspection was carriedout by the of6cials of the FCI aftersix months of the final supplybythe petitionerlt is pertinent to note 6 that the supplyofthe rice was to be made in Sve phasesbetween October to 4 March At no stageduringthe periodof supplyspreading over six months any objectionwas raised regarding the quality of the nce suppliedIt was only when the entire supplywas made and after reiease of payments and securityand after six months the super inspection was said to Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 272 r 1 13 4 14 CWPNo 1911of2010etce be canied out No has been renderedby the FCI for not out any or analysisduringthe six monthsof supply periodor immediately on of supply To the contrary the ofthe deliveryofrice madebythem Theseanalysis were also carriedout by the FCI Apart from above the test said to be conductedby the FCI duringsuper lnspection was carriedout at the back of the 1 It would have been more prudentto associatethe petitioner when duringsuper inspectionany deficiencywas noticed in the rice 0 C0 bythepetitionerbut the FCI chosenot to associatethe petitioner I C5 the suppliers or even informthem lt has also come on record that the I custommilled rice was lyingin thedepotof the FCI The condition under Z whichstoragewas madehasnot been brought on record Admittedlyrice is a item It needsto be keptunderprescribed conditionfor longer 0 life If it is left to vagaries of weather it is open to perishNo such I C materialhas beenbrought on recordor even pleadedin the replyregarding Z the storageconditions of the rice suppliedby the petitionerduringthe m season200809 In any case thepetitioners were not put to any notlce or 7 Z an opportunity of beingheardregarding thequalityspecication Qm beforecarryingout the test or even at the timethetest was conducted This hasresulted into serious violation ofthe principlesofnatural justiceNotice to the petitionerwas givenonlywith regardto replacementof the alleged 4e substandardrice However at the time of determination whether the rice is substandard or not no notice was ever issued to the petitionerThus action of the in refusingdeliveryof rice for the season 20092010 1S not justifiableunder any Clrcumstances have referred to 1 Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 273 7 14 CWPNo 1911of2010 etc ofthe Honble SupremeCoun passedin the case of Tapan Kumar Sadhukhan vseFood of lndia and others 199616 Court Cases 101a In this judgmentHonble Supreme Coun has the needfor improving publichealth While dealingwith the provlSlOnsofFood of India Act 1964 it has been observed thatit is theobligationof the Stateor its agencyto raise nutritionallevel andimprovepublichealth It hasalso beenheld that the Stateshouldnot W allow food grainsto reach marketfor human consumption r without the same so as to make it 6t for humanconsumption 0 0 While referringto this judgmentit has been pleadedon behalf of I C5 that substandardrice cannot be utilized by the State for supply I underthe public distributionsystemas it is injurious to publichealth I fail Z to understand how thisjudgment is relevant in so far as the interesedispute betweenthe petitioner and is concerned Stateand its agencys C4 to providefood grainsflt for human consumption to the needy I c who are dependent upon the State publicdistribution Z system cannot be disputed However thequestionin the presentpetitionlS co breach of mutual contractual obligationsbetween the partiesand 7 Z thereof This judgment does not helpthe in any Om manner exceptto obligatethem to supplyonlysuch food grainsas are St for human consumption byupgradingthesubstandardfood grains Respondents have also pleadedagainstthe ofthe writ J petition on two counts firstly that the writ petition involves disputed questionsof fact and thus discretionaryremedyunder Anicle 226 of the Constitution of India is not available to the petitionersSecondlythere is an arbitrationClauseNol3 in the contract agreement between the parties r Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 274 a 15 e CWPNo911 of2010etce andthe onlyremedyavailableto the petltionerIs to invokethe remedyby wayof arbitration It is true thattheHigh Court while exercisingwrit under Article 226of the Constitutionshould be reluctant to entertain a writ involvingseriousdisputed of fact However this is not a rule oflaw but a rule of discretionwherethe HighCourt exercisesa self imposedrestrictionto avoid to upon disputed of fact 1 inexerciseof writ jurisdiction In thepresentcase theredoes not seem to be r any senous questions of fact so as to decline the pleaof the 0 U in the writ petitionWhat is soughtto be projected as disputed I 0 of fact is the supplymadeby the petitionerduringthe season I 20082009 have pleadedthat the rice suppliedwas Z substandardwhereas the have pleadedthe same to be to the prescribed qualityspecifications The supplyofrice lts r quantityetc 1S an admittedpositionamongstthe partiesThe petitioners I haveplacedon recordanalysisconductedbythe Food oflndia Z thequality underthe agreementandthe CQ norms laid down by the Govemmentof India This fact is not disputedIt m2 Z has however been pleadedbythe that when a super inspection Om was conducted after six months ofthe supplynce supplywas found to be substandardSuchtests were not conducted in the presence of the petitioner or with their association Under thesecircumstances it cannot be said that e1 there are serious disputedquestions of fact The petitioners are disputing the analysisthe test conducted by the respondents at their back whereas the are disputingearlier analysisconducted by their own officials certi67ing the quality So what is beingdisputedis the action 94 Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 275 7 e 16 CWPNoe 1911of2010 etc oftheir own bythe ThisCourt is not calleduponto decide thequestion whethertherice supplied bythe during theseason 200809 1S or not Court is onlyconcernedwith the of contractualobligation and theviolationof the conditionslaid downin theyear 1985order which is statutoryin nature Thus the pleaof the not to interferein exerciseof writ deserves 1 rejectionThe have relied upon a judgment of the Honble Court passed in ABL Internation Ltde And another vse Export 0 0 Credit Guarantee Corporationof India Ltd And others 200413 SCC 0 553 whereinHonbleSupreme Court has held that even wherethereare I questions of fact andthere is no absolutebar for entertaining the Z writpetitionjurisdiction underArticle 226 of the Constitutionof India can beexercised Honble Supreme Courthas even goneto the extent of saying l I that if factsrequireoral evidencecan also be taken in exerciseof writ Where any break of contractualobligationsarises out of Z violation ofnaturaljustice or arbitrary actlon of Staterequires m judicialscrutiny writ can be exercised Relevantobservations 7 Z are contained in 8 of the aforesaid judgmentwhich are Qw here underl As could beseen from thearguments addressedin this appeaiand asalso fromthedivergent views ofthe two couns below one ofthe questions that falls for our considerationis whethera writ petition underArticle 226 of the Constitutionof India is maintainableto enforcea contractualobligationof the Stateor its 4e by an aggrieved party In our opinionthis question is no more res integra and is settled by a largenumberofjudicialpronouncements ofthis Court ln KN Guruswamy V The Stateof Mysoreand others 11955 SCR 3051this Court heldl The next questionis whether the appellant can complainof this by way of a writ In our opinionhe could have done so in an ordinarycase The appellantisinterestedin these contracts and has a right under the laws of the State to receive the same 1 e Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 276 1 1 e1 17 CWPN0 1911of2010 etc treatmentand begiventhesame chanceas anybody else We would thereforein the ordinary course havegiventhe the writ he seeks But owingto the tirne which this matterhas takento reach us 6aconsequencefor which the appellant 1Sln no way to blame for he hasdoneall he couldto have an earlyhearinglthereisbarelya fonnightof thecontmct leflto go A writwouldthereforebeineffectiveandas it is not our practice to lSsue writswe must dismiss this appeal and leavetheappellant contentwithan enunciationofthe lau It is clear from the above observationsof this Court in the said case thougha writ was not issuedon thefactsof that case thisCourl has held that on a given a set of facts if a Stateacts in an arbitrary manner even lIl r a matter of contract an partycan the 0 court by way of writ under Article 226 of the andthe court on factsofthe said C0 case is to grantthe relief 1 I 0 The next questionwhich has been vehementlystressed by the I 1S exlstence of arbitrationclause in the contract agreement Z between the partiesRelevant extract of Clause 23 of the Arbiuation between thepartiesreadsas under I 23A11 the disputesand differencearisingout of or in L0 Z any manner touchingor concerningthis agreement m whatsoever6except as to any matter the decision of W2 which is expresslyprovidedfor in the contractlshall be Z referredto the sole arbitrationof the Director Food and Supplies Director of the Agencyor anyperson appointedby them in this behalf There will be no objectionto any such that the person appointedls or was an employee of Food and Supplies Department and he had expressed views on all or any ofthe matter in dispute or difference The award of such arbitration shall be flnal and binding on both the partiesto this contract r Parkash Om 2014.05.02 13: 56 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 277 r 18 4 CWPNo 1911of2010etc Contentionof the in this regardis also required to be for followingreasons For the session is no disputebetweenthe parties breachof any contractual FCI has simplyre81sedto the rice from