NAVEEN MILLS Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. H.S. Brar, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the Respondents.

(2.) In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to seek counter reply from the Respondents at this stage.

(3.) The Petitioner-rice mill is said to have applied for allocation of paddy for custom milling for Khariff Season 2010-2011. It is averred that the claim for allocation of paddy stands answered in its favour vide order dated 12.1.2010 (Annexure P-3) passed by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 16795 of 2009 (M/s Pooja Rice Mills v. State of Punjab and Ors) and other connected matters.