High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
M/S Aman Transport, Rampur v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 5247 of 2006  RD-AH 2124 (27 January 2006)
Court No. 36
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5247 of 2006
M/S Aman Transport, Rampur
State of U.P. & others
Hon'ble Sushil Harkauli, J.
Hon'ble Sabhajeet Yadav, J.
We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel and also examined the impugned order dated 13.12.2005 (Annexure-15 to this writ petition), which also bears the date 14.12.2005 at the top.
The contention of the petitioner is that he is a transporter entrusted with transporting food-grains of the respondents. The food-grains were being transported in 6 trucks. 5 of them reached the destination. The 6th truck broke down on the way in the late evening hours. According to the petitioner he had informed the officer of the respondents who had instructed the petitioner orally to transfer the food-grains to another truck and deliver the same at the destination. While transferring the food-grains the police seized the vehicle of food-grains and lodged an FIR.
By the impugned order the petitioner has been black listed, his contract has been cancelled and the security has been forfeited.
The case of the petitioner in the representation does not appear to have been property considered by the impugned order. The case of the respondents appears to be that transferring the food-grains to another vehicle was for the purpose of black marketing.
Whether contention of the respondent or contention of the petitioner is correct should have been determined after taking into account the various aspects of the matter. For example, the place where the food-grains were being transferred to another vehicle. Whether that place falls on the normal route of the vehicle or the original vehicle carrying food-grains was diverted from the route and was detected at a place which was not on the normal route. It would not be the normal conduct of a person desiring to black market food-grains to change vehicles on the route itself. Normally, that person would take vehicle to some isolated spot away from the route for transferring the food-grains. If transporting is taking place on the route itself it would prima facie suggest that story of broking down of the vehicle is correct. Similarly, whether the vehicle actually broke down, should have also been considered after considering what was mentioned in the police papers and other material the petitioner produced to show the repair of the vehicle.
The ownership of the vehicle to which food-grain was being transferred is also an important aspect to be examined for considering the truth or otherwise of the petitioner's contention.
In the circumstances, we allow this writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 14.12.2005 (Annexure-15 to this writ petition), requiring the respondent no. 3 to reconsider the matter afresh by a reasoned order after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after considering such evidence as the petitioner may produce in his defence. The decision will be taken by the respondent no. 3 within a month of the date on which a certified copy of this order is presented before him by the petitioner.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.