IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3603 of 2011 Date of Decision : February 28, 2011. M/s Sandeep Rice Mills .....Petitioner versus Director and Special Secretary to Govt. of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.L.S.Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Monica Chhibbar Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 and 5. Mr.H.S.Brar, Advocate, for respondent No.3. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Ms.Monica Chhibbar Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 & 5 and Mr.H.S.Brar, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.3. Let two copies each of the writ petition be supplied to learned counsel for the respondents. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass neither there is any necessity to issue notice to respondent Nos.2, 4 & 6 nor any need to seek counter-reply from respondent Nos.1, 3 & 5. The petitioner-Rice Mill seeks a mandamus to direct the respondents to lift the rice from its premiss which is lying milled against 11066.65 quintals of paddy stored with the petitioner-Mill during KMS C.W.P.No .3603 of 2011 2 2008-2009 and/or to sell the said rice to the petitioner at the price fixed by respondent No.3. The petitioner further seeks a direction that the aforesaid milled rice can be disposed of by the respondents in an open auction on “as it is and where it is” basis. The petitioner avers that in the event of the respondents not lifting the milled rice within a reasonable period, the rice will be rotten and huge financial loss will be caused to the petitioner-mill without any fault on its part. In this regard, the petitioner-mill is said to have served the respondents with a Justice Demand Notice-cum- representation dated 17.2.2011 (Annexure P-5) but without any response thereto. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner-mill and considering the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, however, without expressing any views in relation to the petitioner's claim, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.3 to take an appropriate decision on the claim made by the petitioner in the above-mentioned Justice Demand Notice-cum-representation, within a period of three weeks from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Ms.Monica Chhibbar Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab and Mr.H.S.Brar, Advocate, for information and necessary compliance. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. February 28, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE