9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr.G.Murugendran, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the 1st respondent and Mr.U.Karunakaran, learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. 2. In the light of the order which this Court proposes to pass, notice to the 3rd respondent is dispensed with. 3. The petitioner is a dealer in sago and sago products having purchased ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom participating in the daily tender sales for four years. 5. It is not clear as to in what manner the petitioner had brought disrepute to the second respondent society and the order dated 24.03.2017 passed by the second respondent, impugned in this writ petition, has been passed without issuing any show cause notice. Therefore, it is not understandable as to what is the basis for the impugned o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order reads as follows: " 5. In terms of the above test report, it is evident that the sago conforms to the standards for the test carried out under Regulation 2.4.14(2) of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives), Regulations, 2011 r/w 4(31) 2016/Tamilnadu/Enf/FSSAI, New Delhi, dated 28.03.2017. 6. In the light of the above, the Writ Petition is allowed and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... However, taking note of the fact that samples which were intercepted and tested were found to be in order, without any adulteration, this Court is inclined to interfere with the impugned order. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. However, it is open to the second respondent to take appropriate action against the petitioner in the event of the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
