M/S Sakhi Rai Parcel Service v. Union Of India And ORS

Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

$~7 to 10 OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI TN THE HIGH COURT W.P.(C) 5953/2017, CM No. 24713/2017 W P (C) 6081/2017, CM'No. 25253/2017 W P (C) 6342/2017, CM No. 26268/2017 W.P.(C) 6360/2017, CM No. 26352/2017 AMIT RAIL CARGO M/S SAKHIRAI PARCEL SERVICE M/S CITY LOGISTICS M/S. R R CARGO SERVICES THROUGH + + + + ; ITS PROPRIETOR'

v/ ....Petitioner Mr. Ashish Mohan, Mr. Mohit Kumar and Mr. Akshit Mago, Advs.

Through:

versus un io n of INDIA AND ORS Respondent Mr. Jagjit Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Preet Singh & Mr.

Narayan Dev Parashar, Advs.

Through:

ho TM MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

ORDER

30.07.2018 '■J % AU the four petitions involve a common challenge, inasmuch as the 1.

/ challenged the orders have petitioners cancelling their e-registration / cancellation of all existing contracts / forfeiture of registration fee / debarring from fresh registration forfeiture of security deposit / blacklisting for a period of five years.

After some arguments'. Mr. Ashish Mohan confine these writ petitions 2.

challenge with regard to forfeiture of security deposit of all only to a He states, the respondents have invoked paras 4.15 and existing contracts Parcel Leasing Policy of 2014. According to 4.25 of the Comprehensive , the same is not applicable in the facts of this him, on a reading of para 4.15 forfeiture of security deposit. It is f case, issued by the respondents to and para 4.25 does not contemplate his submission that no show cause notice was to the extent of before passing the impugned orders, even the petitioners forfeiture of security deposit.

made by Mr. Ashish Mr. Jagjit Singh, on noting the submissions 3.

confining the writ petitions only to the extent Mohan that the petitioners are . of forfeiture of security deposit of all existing contracts, submits that the to the respondents shall issue show cause ;e notice to each of the petitioners of security deposit of all existing contracts and call for a extent of forfeiture reply from the petitioners and pass a final order.

4. Having noted the submission made by Mr. Jagiit Singh, these writ to issue show cause disposed of by directing the respondents are petitions within four weeks from today to the extent notice to each of the petitioners and invite reply f security deposit of all the existing contracts of forfeiture o

r weeks thereafter and pass reasoned within four from each of the petitioners and speaking order within six thereafter and communicate the weeks still aggrieved by the order decision to the petitioners. If the petitioners are as available to be passed, liberty is with the petitioners to seek such remedy in law.

counter affidavit filed in It is noted that the Registry has tagged-the 5.

Union of India and ors in W.P.(C) No. 5953/2017 Amit Rail Cargo vs Registry shall de-tag the said counter affidavit W.P.(C) No. 6081/2017. The . 5953/2017.

and tag the same in W.P.(C) No rM No. 24713/2017 in W.P.fC) 5953/2011 CM No. 25253/2017 in W.Pi(C) 6081/20^ riu Nn. 26268/^ni7 in W.P.(C) 6342/2^ Mn in W.P.(Q 6360/2012 Dismissed as infructuous.

V. KAMESW^RAO, J JULY 30, 20\S/ak \