MUKESH GLASS INDUSTRIES Vs. STATION MASTER FIROZABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Garg, learned advocate for the writ petitioner and Sri Shitla Sahai, learned advocate for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner is not a licensee or any other person acting on behalf of the licensee under clause (11) of U. P. Coal Control Order, 1977 and as such, in our view, there is no requirement of counter signature. The view which, we have taken, is supported by the decision of unreported judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of S. R. Glass Industries, Mainpuri Gate, Firozabad and others v. Station Master. Firozabad. Northern Railway and others. Writ Petition No. Nil of 1989, decided on 13.2.1989. In the aforesaid decision, it was held that since the petitioners are neither licensees nor persons acting on behalf of any licnesee within the meaning of clause (11) of U. P. Control Order, 1977, the opposite-parties are not justified in insisting that the coal consignment of the petitioners can be released only after they obtain the endorsement from the Director of Industries. Another Division Bench of this Court has also followed the same view in the case of Atul Glass Industries, Mahalarpur and others v. Station Master, Firozabad, Shikohabad, Northern Railway and others. Writ Petition No. 13612 of 2000, decided on 27.3.2000. We do not find any reason to take a different view in the instant case. Considering all aspects of the matter, we are of the view that the petitioner should succeed in the writ petition.

(3.) The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed.