HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34652 of 2018 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Heard Sri Narendra Mohan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 1, Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 4 and perused the record. 2. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayer:- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to make payment of transportation charges for the year 2016-17 and 2017-18 on the basis of transportation rates fixed by the Committee vide order dated 21.9.2017. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to take appropriate decision on the representation of the petitioner filed as annexure nos. 8 and 9 to the writ petition." 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier also the petitioner has approached this Court by filing Writ-C No. 45193 of 2013, Purvanchal Rice Millers Association vs. The State of U.P. Thru Secy. and 3 others as well as Writ-C No. 34808 of 2016, Purvanchal Rice Millers Association vs. State of U.P. and 3 others before this Court for identical relief but for the period of 2010-11 till 2015-16. The aforesaid writ Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhilesh Kumar, Narendra Mohan, Shiv Nath Singh(Senior Adv.) Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashok Kumar Pandey, C.S.C., Pranjal Mehrotra Purvanchal Rice Millers Association .....Petitioner(s) State Of U P And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) petitions were finally disposed of by this Court vide judgement and order dated 19.10.2016. It is argued that till date, the payment of transportation charges for the year 2016-17 and 2017-18 on the basis of transportation rates fixed by the committee vide order dated 21.9.2017, has not been paid. 4. It is further argued that in this regard, time and again representations were filed by the petitioner before the respondent no. 4, namely, the Regional Food Controller, Varanasi Region Varanansi but till date, no decision has been taken. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner. 5. On the other hand it is argued by Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the aforesaid respondents that the respondent no. 4 shall take decision in the matter expeditiously. 6. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of. 7. In the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh representation ventilating all his grievances before the respondent no. 4 along-with certified copy of this order within a period of three weeks from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent no. 4 is directed to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and also taking into consideration the judgement and order dated 19.10.2016 passed in Writ-C No. 45193 of 2013 (Supra) within a further period of two months. 8. In case, if it is found that the petitioner is entitled for the payment of the aforesaid transportation charge, the same would be paid within next four weeks. 9. With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition is disposed of finally. October 7, 2025 SY WRIC No. 34652 of 2018 2 (Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHAMA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SUSHAMA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad