AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.H.S. Ansari, J.—The petitioner is a Roller Flour Mill and has questioned the action of the respondent-Food Corporation of India in not allotting wheat to the petitioner for the month of September, 1996 as illegal and arbitrary and sought a direction'' for allotment and release of wheat on par with other allottees.
The petitioner had earlier filed a Writ Petition No. 19955 of 1996 which was disposed of at admission stage by a learned single Judge of this Court with the observation that the application of the petitioner will be considered on its merits on par with other applicants in the light of the statement made by the Standing Counsel for the Corporation.
The grievance of the petitioner is that on the very day on which the orders were passed by this Court, a list was displaced on the notice board of the 1st respondent''s office and the petitioner''s name was not found among the persons who had been allotted wheat.
A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents ''1 and 2 and it is stated therein that pursuant to the notice for open sale published in various daily newspapers, 2210 applications were received between 3-9-1996 to 7-9-1996 in the entire State. A Committee consisting of the 1st respondent, Joint Manager (Finance) and Director of Civil Supplies has been constituted on 18-9-1996 have scrutinised and considered all the applications so received. The Committee decided to issue 20 MTs for the applicants who have applied for 150 MTs and above and 10 MTs for those who have applied below 150 MTs keeping in view the total allotment of 15000 MTs during September, 1996 for Andhra Pradesh Region. The entire quantity of 15000 MTs was exhausted after considering eligible applications received up to 6th on the basis of "first come first serve basis". All the applications received on 7-9-1996 and those that are received after 3 p.m. on 6th could not get allotment. Reference has been made also to different quantities issued to Government organisations and the balance allotted to the buyers. With regard to the consideration of the application of the petitioner in the light of the observations made by this Court, referred to above, it is stated in the counter that the Committee noted the application of the petitioner which was filed on 7-9-1996 at 1-15 p.m. and since the number of applications received were more than what could be accommodated with the allotted quantity, the Committee followed the principle and made allotment without any "pick and choose method" and the petitioner''s application was considered along with eligible applications on "first come first serve" basis till the stocks lasted. The other allegations made by the petitioner have been denied.
Learned counsel, for the petitioner contended that the respondent being a State within the meaning of Art. 12 of the Constitution of India is required to act in equitable manner and the action of the petitioner in making allotment has been most improper. It was the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the basis adopted "first come first serve" is neither valid nor tenable and there is no warrant for the same. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to demonstrate the said contention by submitting that the publication inviting applications was made in the newspapers and that in Eenadu Telugu News daily, the same appeared only on 5-9-1996 in Tirupathi edition and the time given for submitting the applications notified was up to 7-9-1996. 5th being a holiday for the Banks, the petitioner could obtain the Demand Draft on 6-9-1996 and submitted its application on 7-9-1996. Whereas the respondent-Organisation has considered applications which have been received by it on 3-9-1996 as well i.e., even before the date of publication in any newspaper. According to the respondent, the applications have been received on 3-9-1996 in pursuance of the notice which was displayed on the Notice Board in the District Office on 3-9-1996.
Sri B. Anjaneyulu, learned counsel for the respondent-Organisation relied upon the guidelines contained in the communication of the FCI Headquarters, New Delhi No. J/1 (1)/95/PY.S.III, dated 25-9-1995 addressed to the Sr. Regional Manager, FCI RO, Hyderabad and others and in particular to the following wherein it is specifically directed
that instructions as to "first come first serve" should be adopted scrupulously henceforth.
Sri Duba V. Nagarjuna Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, stated that the old procedure has been replaced by instructions dated 2-9-1996 which was communicated to the respondents by Fax/Telex Message. In the said communication dated 2-9-1996, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there is no requirement for allotment of wheat, on "first come first serve basis". It was further contended that the respondents are obliged to follow the procedure prescribed in the Message dated 2-9-1996 which specifically lays down the procedure to be followed for identification of allottees/prospective buyers for sale of wheat. Sri B. Anjaneyulu, learned counsel for the respondents, however, contended that there is nothing contained in the Circular dated 2-9-1996 superseding the earlier Circular dated 25-9-1995.
The short question, therefore, for consideration is whether the allotment is to be made as per the procedure prescribed under Fax/Telex Message dated 2-9-1996 and also as per the FCI Circular dated 25-9-1995.
As already noticed above, in its 1st Circular dated 25-9-1995, the District Managers/Senior Regional Managers, FCI were directed to follow "first come first serve basis" scrupulously. Whereas there is no such requirement in the said Circular dated 2-9-19%. The 2nd Circular, however, specifically states that the sale of foodgrains (wheat and rice) under OMSS (D) is subject to the terms and conditions specified therein:
In paragraph (A) thereof, general conditions are prescribed with regard to the ceiling as well as the documentation to be submitted by prospective buyers. There is, however, no requirement prescribed for allotment on "first come first serve basis."
Paragraph (C) dealing with the issue of wheat in sub-clause (vi) specifically states as follows:
(vi) the procedure to be followed for identification of allottees/prospective buyers for sale of wheat only will be as under:
(a) A Committee prescribed over by SRM of the Region and Director (Food and Civil Supplies) of the concerned State Government or his/her representative and Jt, Manager (A/cs) or in his absence DM (A/cs) as members will be formed to decide the names of the prospective buyers along with quantity of wheat to be given to the applicants/'' intending buyers without exceeding the ceiling limit prescribed under Item A(iv).
(b) The District Manager, FCI will receive the applications from the intending/prospective buyers upto 7th of each month along with 10% Earnest Money for the quantity intended not exceeding the ceiling mentioned at A(iv) above. The concerned District Manager will ensure that applications of the intending buyers are entered in a register by giving serial number, date and time of receipt along with quantity and depot/GAP storage from which stocks are indented etc. These applications along with full details will be sent to SRM for consideration of the Committee before 10th of each month.
(c) The Committee will scrutinise the applications and then the finalised allotment list will be sent to the concerned District (on) 15th of the month for issue of release orders to the buyers. The buyers will have to deposit the,, full amount after adjusting the EMD as per the prices in force on the date of delivery.
(d) The District Manager, FCI will display the list of allottees along with the respective quantity allotted to them in the Notice Board. Similar action should also be taken for display of names of allottees along with quantities in the Notice Board of FCI Regional Office and in the office of the Director (Food and Civil Supplies) of concerned State Government.
It will thus-be seen that a specific procedure has been prescribed to be followed for identification of allottees/prospective buyers. The scrutiny of the applications is by a Committee and the manner of receipt of applications and entering them in Register with reference to SI. No., date and time of receipt etc., is prescribed therein. Scrutiny of applications by the Committee and finalization (of) allotment lists and display of the list of allottees along with respective quantity allotted is prescribed therein.
In the light of the specific procedure prescribed as above, it is difficult to accept the contention of the respondent that the earlier Circular dated 25-9-1995 still prevails and that the "first come first serve basis" is still a requirement to be followed.
In the circumstances, the contention of the respondent that the procedure prescribed for following the "first come first serve basis" is a part of the guideline cannot be accepted. The whole object of issuing fresh guidelines dated 2-9-1996 is to ensure equitable distribution and it has been stated therein that the sale of foodgrains is subject to the terms and conditions contained therein and, therefore, the reliance of the respondents on its earlier Circular dated 25-9-1995 is not appropriate.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that persons such as the petitioner have been placed at a disadvantage by the aforesaid process of "first come first serve basis" on the ground that the publication made in the newspapers came to the knowledge of the petitioner only on 5-9-1996 whereas the others could file their applications even before newspaper publication i.e., on 3-9-1996. The said procedure, therefore, cannot be followed as it is discriminatory and to the advantage of those who may have advanced knowledge or come to know of" the same by other sources even before publication of notice in the newspapers, it was contended. The said contention of the learned counsel merits consideration and as demonstrated in the instant case, the notification was published on 5-9-1996 which was a Bank Holiday and the petitioner could obtain the demand draft only on the next day from the Bank i.e., on 6-9-1996 and even according to the respondents, allotment was made only in respect of such applications which had been received upto 6-9-1996 by 3 PM of 6-9-1996.
It is thus amply demonstrated that the practice being adopted by the Committee for considering eligible applications on the basis of "first come first serve basis" has resulted in discrimination against the petitioner and, therefore, it is necessary to issue appropriate directions that the respondents shall have to consider all applications received by them upto due date in equitable manner. Even according to the respondents, the Committee decided to allot 20 Mis. for the applicants who have applied for 150 MTs and above and 10 MTs for those who applied below 150 MTs keeping in view the available stocks with the object of equitable distribution and it is, therefore, necessary that the principle would have to be extended to all eligible applicants in the same manner so that all those eligible applicants who have complied with the requirements as prescribed by the respondent-Organisation are considered depending upon the stocks available for allotment in the same manner as the allotment was restricted to 20 MTs and 10 MTs to ensure larger number of applicants being catered to. A similar scheme needs to be evolved for equitable (proportionate) distribution amongst all eligible applicants and not on the basis of "first come first serve basis."
However, insofar as the allotments for Sept. 1996 are concerned, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same and no relief in the above writ petition can be granted to the petitioner for the allotments already made by the respondent on the basis of "first come first serve basis."
It is, however, directed that for the future months, the respondents shall follow the equitable distribution method without recourse to "first come first serve basis" and the Committee prescribed for scrutinising and allotting wheat shall fix the, limits keeping in view the total number of applications received and separating therefrom the eligible applicants who have fulfilled all the conditions prescribed and thereafter making allotment so that all the eligible applicants are made allotment and are not left out without any allotment.
With the observations and directions as above, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Order accordingly.