DSCL SUGAR-RUPAPUR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Anoop Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents and Sri Sudeep Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 6.

(2.) This petition seeks to challenge the order dated 08.01.2016, passed by the State Government dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner-sugar mill against the cane reservation order dated 19.11.2015 so far as the same assigns the Madnapur-A cane center to respondent No.6.

(3.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Cane Commissioner while assigning the Cane Purchase Center in question to respondent No.6 has not taken into account the total estimated requirement of the cane and the allotted quantity to the petitioner-sugar mill and further that the respondent-sugar mill has been allotted more quantity of the sugar cane than the estimated requirement. He has also stated that the impugned order passed by the Cane Commissioner as also the appellate order are not in conformity with the provisions contained in Rule 22 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Rules, 1954.