Finding the quality to be defective, the CBI initiated prosecution against numerous rice millers and additionally recommended blacklisting of a total of 182 millers for a Page 2 period of three years for Beyond Rejection Limit BRL rice and five years for Beyond Prevention of Food Adulteration BPFA rice.
A reference to one such lease deed of 21.09.2011 shows that the rice mill of M s Sharma Rice Mills along with land measuring 21 kanal 16 marlas on which it was situated was leased to another firm, M s BK Traders.
FACTS It was companymon practice in Punjab for different government agencies to allocate paddy for custom milling to hundreds of rice mills, which in turn would supply the rice, post milling as per approved specifications, to the appellantFCI.
The primary issue before the High Court was whether or number the respondents, who had taken over on leasehold basis certain blacklisted rice mills, were entitled to allocation of paddy for custom milling.
In the case of millers whose stocks were in mixed companydition though the same was found beyond PFA and were given benefit of doubt by the CBI, the proposal for limiting the ban to a period of Five 05 Kharif Marketing Seasons KMS w.e.f.
As regards the millers who stocks were found BRL by the CBI, the proposal for limiting the ban to a period of three 03 Kharif Marketing Seasons KMS w.e.f.
The land, building, machinery and plant were leased out for an annual Page 4 companysideration of Rs 2 lakhs.
These appeals have arisen from an order dated 21.10.2013 passed by a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court whereby a batch of letterspatent appeals filed by the Food Corporation of India FCI challenging a learned Single Judges order of 15.03.2012 was dismissed.
Such allocation would take place through terms of a bipartite agreement and the same took place for the Kharif Marketing Season of 200405 hereinafter, KMS also.
Such details have been furnished by the companynsel through a chart which shows how lakhs of rupees were recoverable by the FCI.
Page 1 Leave granted.
the date of imposition of ban, has been accepted.
the date of imposition of ban, has been accepted.
Most of the lessees were only newly companystituted entities.
Notably, all such lease deeds were unregistered.
