Heard Sri Aseem Chandra and Sri Somesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate and A.S.G for the respondent no.1 and Sri Shikhar Anand, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4.
Sri Somesh Tripathi has filed supplementary affidavit which is taken on record.
Sri Shikhar Anand has filed application for dismissal of the writ petition along with preliminary submission on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 which is taken on record.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed following reliefs:-
"(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned Notification No. 130 dated 02.06.2021 as well as impugned Circular No. EP-05-2021-22 dated 06.07.2021 (Annexure Nos. 4 & 5).
(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the opposite parties not to recover any amount from the petitioner pursuant to the impugned notification and circular.
(iii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the opposite parties to not to give any effect to the impugned notification and circular affecting the petitioners."
The learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court towards Annexure No.09 which is a representation dated 15.07.2021 preferred by the petitioner to the Chairman and Managing Director, Food Corporation of India, Headquarters, New Delhi which is pending consideration.
Sri Shikhar Anand has drawn the attention of the Court towards para 4 of the preliminary submission which reads as under:-
"That the contents of paragraph 3 of the writ petition except for the matters of record are specifically denied. Once the petitioners have filed the writ petition, they must come with clean hands and substantiate their submissions. Therefore, it was for the petitioners to place before the Hon'ble Court as to what has been the outcome of their alleged representation which they have filed at Annexure 9 to the writ petition. In the paragraph under reply, the petitioners have alleged that they had served the representation to opposite party no.2 through email, but they have not annexed any email report/print in order to substantiate the aforesaid submission. On verification of the records, it is seen that Annexure 9 of the writ petition i.e. the representation dated 15.07.2021 of Sri Mayank Chandra, Manager (G), Gorakhpur, UP, the same has been received in FCI, Hqrs. ZE Division via email and the representation is presently under process for further action. Since the representation of the petitioner is still under consideration, the instant writ petition is highly premature and hence liable to be dismissed. It is further submitted that the decision on the representation shall be taken by FCI within 90 days if permitted by this Court."
Sri Shikhar Anand has submitted that since the aforesaid representation of the petitioner is pending consideration, therefore, unless and until any decision is taken by the authority concerned this writ petition may not be maintained.
Sri Aseem Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that by means of impugned notification and circular which amends Regulation 86 which has been made operative retrospectively, however, the same cannot be done as per the settled propositions of law. Sri Chandra has further submitted that whatever amount has been paid to the petitioner, the same may not be recovered from him, however, the amended Regulation 86 may hold the field with effect from the date when such amendment has been made.
Be that as it may, since the issue in question is pending consideration before the competent authority, as considered above, therefore, the authority concerned shall consider and decide the said representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law within the prescribed period under the statutory prescription, by speaking and reasoned order by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, if it is so required under the law, and the decision thereof shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. Appropriate decision may be taken within a period of 90 days as indicated in para 4 of the preliminary submission filed by Sri Shikhar Anand, therefore, it is expected that till the disposal of representation no coercive action be taken against the petitioners as this would suffice the interest of justice and equity.
Since, this order has been passed by this Court without entering into the merits of the issue, therefore, the prayer no.1 made in the writ petition shall be treated as not pressed at this stage. While producing the certified copy/computer generated copy of this order, the petitioners may prefer a fresh interim relief application before the competent authority who may pass appropriate order as per law.
The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Order Date :- 17.8.2021 Vikas/-