HARNAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions have been posted for admission and raise common questions of fact and law,

(2.) THE petitioner in both the cases are mule operators and work for carrying goods from Kishtwar to the interior parts of Tehsil Kishtwar. They have averred in their petitions that they whenever required by the Thesildar Kishtwar, transport food grains on their flock of mules to tha interior parts of the Tehsil. The food grains were delivered by them at the fixed destination against payment of agreed freight. The Director Food and Supplies purportedly acting under section 90 of the Land Revenue Act certified by the impugned order that amounts were due from the petitioners for the cost of bags of wheat allegedly not delivered by the petitioners at the destination The said order, however, does not refer to the period of time when the alleged non -delivery took place ; that no notice, what -so -ever, was given to the petitioners for explaining their cases by the said Director before determining the liability of the petitioners to pay the amount and before the issue of the certificates under Section 90 of the Land Revenue Act The petitioners did deliver the food grains at the destination against payment of freight. The petitioners have challenged impugeed order and also the vires of Section 90 of the Act on the following grounds: -

(3.) A notice was issued to the respondents to show cause as to why the petition be not admitted. In obedience to the said notice the Add. Advocate General appeared on behalf of the respondents and he has contested the question of admission of the writ petition. As the matter involved in both the petitions is identical therefore this single judgment will dispose both of them.