2025:HHC:42897 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3603 of 2021 a/w CWP No.3994 of 2015 Decided on: 09.12.2025 CWP No.3603 of 2021 M/s Maa Chamunda Flour Mills … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others … Respondents CWP No.3994 of 2015 M/s Maa Chamunda Flour Mills … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & another … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Jaswal, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, for the respondents-State. Ms. Parul Negi, Advocate, for respondent No.3, in CWP No.3603 of 2021 Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of these petitions, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- CWP No.3603 of 2021 “(i). That a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued thereby directing the respondents to revise the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:42897 Transportation/carriage rates/handling charges of wheat/wheat flour of the petitioner's mill w.e.f 2016 after taking in to consideration of Annexure-P/12, Annexure- P/15 to 19, Annexure-P/26, 27, Annexure-37 (revision of rates) and also pay the arrears of balance, thereof, as the petitioner is performing same and identical work as is being performed by the vehicles of HP.C.S.C Ltd,./truck operator union Chamba or others registered mills vehicles of District Chamba and Kangra H.P. and discriminated by the respondents in the matter of fixation of revised carriage /handling rates which is totally unconstitutional. (ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to pay balance of arrears in lieu of carriage rates/handling charges as being deducted from the accounts of petitioner mill from FCI Godown Gujjar Ka-Talab (Nurpur) District Kangra to petitioner Mill i.e. Lahru (District Chamba) H.P, by the H.P.S.C.S.C Ltd,. for the years 2016-2017 & 2017- 2018 .i.e. difference of Rs.22.75 paise per qtl. to Rs.57.75 paise per qtl. carriage rates/handling charges taken being wheat carriage. CWP No.3994 of 2015 “(i) That by issuance of writ in nature of mandamus respondent No. 2 i.e. District Controller, Food Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Chamba, H.P. may kindly be directed to comply the office order No. 1169-76 dated 15.05.2014 and office order No 63-70 dated 06-04-2015 in case of petitioner unit it also also ie. Maa Chamunda Flour Mill, Lahru Chowar, District Chamba, H.P. Annexure 3 2025:HHC:42897 P-7 and P-15 in its letter and spirit as issued in favour of truck union Chamba and Mai Ka Baag Floor Mill, Chamba, H.P. (ii) That petitioner may kindly be given revised carriage rates in terms of office order No. 1169-76 dated 15.5.2014 and office order No 63-70 dated 06-04-2015 from the date of its issuance and arrears so accrued may kindly be ordered to be paid to petitioner mill also i.e. Maa Chamunda Flour Mill, Lahru Chowari, District Chamba, H.P. (iii) That respondents may kindly be directed to pay arrears in terms of carriage rates as revised in the year, 2013 and 2015 since initial supply of petitioner unit i.e. Maa Chamunda Flour Mill, Lahru Chowari, District Chamba, H.P.” 2. During the course of pendency of these petitions, in light of the orders passed by this Court, the respondent-Department further negotiated with the petitioner and the rates entered by the respondents with the petitioner were enhanced also. 3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the controversy involved in this petition, this Court is of the considered view that on merit no mandamus can be issued by this Court in the mode and manner in which the petitioner has prayed for. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the 4 2025:HHC:42897 transportation/ carriage rates/ charges and in light of the fact that this is a purely commercial deal and relationship between the petitioner and the respondents, it is for the petitioner to take a call as to whether it wants to accept the offer of the respondent- Department for transportation of goods on the rates being offered or not. In fact, after voluntarily accepting the terms and conditions offered to the petitioner by the respondent-Department, this Court also doubts the locus of the petitioner to subsequently approach this Court and seek mandamus as is being prayed for. 5. Therefore, as this Court seeks to reason to further entertain these petitions, the same are closed. The petitions stand disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge December 09, 2025 (Rishi) 5 2025:HHC:42897 0000