Manoj Kumar vs Delhi State Civil Supplies ...
2009 Latest Caselaw 3992 Del

1.
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+     W.P.(C) 2807/2008

      MANOJ KUMAR                             ..... Petitioner
                        Through Mr. G.L.N. Murthy, Advocate.

                  versus

      DELHI STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORP. LTD.&ANR ..... Respondents
                      Through Mr. Amit Kumar & Mr. Somesh Chandra,
                Advocates.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

               ORDER

% 05.10.2009

The impugned order dated 28th March, 2008 is based upon the

report of the Enforcement Branch of Food and Supplies Department,

Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, which had conducted a

search in a godown located in Boodpur Village, Alipur, Delhi and rice

meant for Public Distribution System was seized on the spot. A truck with

number HR-55A-5455 was found inside the godown and on inspection it

was found to be loaded with 268 bags of rice and 21 and 18 bags were

found to be marked with FPS Nos. 4755 and 8876. The FPS numbers on

rest of the bags were rubbed of with red ink. 11,600 bags of rice of

different types were found in the godown. One Bahadur made a

statement that four more trucks with Public Distribution System rice were

unloaded in the godown on the same day. Statement of the truck driver was also recorded. In his statement, the truck driver had stated that the

rice was being de-loaded in the godown on the basis of the instructions

given by the petitioner. An FIR was also registered under the Essential

Commodities Act, 1955. The truck found at the godown bearing No. HR

55A 5455 was one of the trucks, which had been hired by the petitioner

for supply of food grains under the Public Distribution System. The

impugned order dated 28th March, 2008 is a detailed order, which takes

into consideration various contentions raised by the petitioner. The

petitioner has raised only factual disputes contesting the findings of fact

recorded in the impugned order. The impugned order does not merit

interference while exercise of power of judicial review under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India.

The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

OCTOBER 05, 2009 VKR