HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 35006 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Shri Dadhi Bal Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Mukul Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Present petition has been filed against the impugned recovery certificate dated 09.05.2025 issued by Tehsildar at Mirzapur seeking recovery of Rs. 5,48,43,750/- plus recovery charges. 3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is, the petitioner has fully complied with the terms of the order dated 25.10.2014 passed in Writ - C No. 19832 of 2013, M/s Kumar Industries vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. & 4 Ors., Neutral Citation No.-2014:AHC:91618-DB. Though Arbitration Case No. 798 of 2014 is thus pending, violating the terms of the order dated 25.10.2014, present recovery has been issued. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel would submit, the petitioner has not complied with the terms of the order dated 25.10.2024 inasmuch as it has not made the pre-deposit CMR @ Rs. 1611.93 per quintal as provided in paragraph 67 of the earlier decision of the coordinate bench of this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35296 of 2013, M/s Maa Bhawani Rice Mill and another vs State of U.P. through Special Secretary and others, decided on 24.02.2014. 5. Besides the issue of competence of the arbitration proceedings, the interim protection contemplated and provided to the petitioner by earlier Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dadhi Bal Yadav, Prakash Chandra Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Kumar Industries .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) order dated 25.10.2014 passed in it's case, is not available. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, paragraph 67 of the M/s Maa Bhawani Rice Mill (supra) read as below: "67. Thus, after taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances, and while balancing individual interest of the petitioners on one hand, and the public interest on the other hand, we consider it expedient to direct the petitioners to deposit the price of paddy/ proportionate price of CMR @ Rs.1611.93 per quintal with the State Government within a period of one month from today. The petitioners will make a self calculation of the amount as per the figures of deficit CMR given in the impugned orders and deposit the same within the period stipulated above, without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the arbitrator. Amount already deposited under interim order of this Court or in pursuance of the recovery certificates issued in particular cases, shall be adjusted while calculating the amount due, to be deposited under this order. Only, on such deposit being made, all recovery proceedings and consequential action, including orders debarring/ blacklisting the millers from future hulling shall remain in abeyance. The Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies will proceed to adjudicate upon the rival claims of the parties. The State Government as well as petitioners are free to file their respective statement of claims before the Arbitrator, who shall make all endeavour to conclude the arbitration proceedings within a further period of six months, uninfluenced by any observation made in this judgment. Recovery of any further sum from petitioners shall abide by the final outcome of the arbitration proceedings. Those who fail to deposit the price of paddy at the rate and within the timeframe as stipulated above, their writ-petitions will be deemed to be dismissed. In some cases, the petitioners have raised dispute regarding quantity of paddy received and / or the quantity of deficit CMR. It shall be open to those petitioners to raise such dispute also before the Arbitrator, but for making deposit of the amount as directed by this Court, the figures mentioned in the impugned orders will be assumed to be correct, failing which their writ petitions will be treated to be dismissed." (emphasis supplied) 7. Clearly, the remedy of arbitration was provided to the petitioner, conditionally. It could arise and be made available to the petitioner subject to its making pre-deposit of the proportionate price of CMR @ Rs. 1611.93 per quintal for 1620 quintals. Thus, the total amount required to be deposited by the petitioner would be Rs. 26,09,820/-. The petitioner has not made that deposit. However, his arbitration case has been registered and is pending. WRIC No. 35006 of 2025 2 8. Independent of the issue of maintainability of the arbitration proceedings, in absence of that pre-deposit being made, the interim protection granted by the coordinate bench in M/s Kumar Industries (supra) i.e. earlier petition filed by the present petitioner is not available. Thus, recovery proceedings do not suffer from any legal infirmity or doubt. 9. Prayer made for payment through installment at this stage cannot be accepted as the petitioner has slept over the earlier order passed in it's favour, eleven years ago. Therefore, no indulgence may be granted to such a litigant. 10. Writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. October 7, 2025 Prakhar WRIC No. 35006 of 2025 3 (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad