AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jagmohan Bansal, J
On 21.11.2023, the following order was passed by this Court:-
“Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that plinths of the petitioner have been secluded from the storage of paddy. The respondents considered and found 81 sites suitable which have been declared temporary market yards. The premises of the petitioner, at the earlier occasion, was declared temporary market yard, however, for KMS 2023-24, the petitioner has been rejected without assigning any reason. The Secretary, Punjab Mandi Board vide impugned order has rejected claim of the petitioner on the sole ground that District Allotment Committee has not recommended the case of the petitioner.
Notice of motion, returnable for 30.11.2023.
Mr. Inderpreet Singh Kang, AAG, Punjab, who on advance notice is present in Court, accepts notice and seeks time to get instructions.
To be shown in the urgent list.”
Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondents No. 1, 2 and 4 submit that as season is over, the present petition has rendered infructuous.
The actual grievance of the petitioner is confined in CWP No. 11174 of 2021 which is pending before Division Bench of this Court.
Without commenting upon merits of the case, however, considering the fact that season is over, the petition stands disposed of with a request to State to sympathetically consider case of the petitioner for subsequent years.