Nagpur: The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has upheld the two-year blacklisting of Om Rice Mill, located in Kharbi, District – Bhandara, following alleged violations of government procurement policies.
The petitioner, Dinesh Sitaram Acharya, proprietor of the mill, had challenged the blacklisting imposed by the authorities and filed a writ petition to contest the decision. The allegations are –Acharya’s rice mill had breached clauses of the government resolution governing the procurement and processing of paddy. The State, acting on behalf of the Union of India, oversees a scheme for the procurement of agricultural produce, including paddy, which is crucial for food distribution and supply chain management.
Gold Rate
09 May 2025
According to the court’s findings, Acharya was accused of irregularities related to the transport and processing of Custom Milled Rice (CMR). The government alleged that on May 19, 2023, Acharya’s mill lifted processed rice without complying with mandatory quality checks and directly dispatched it which bypassed the designated government godown. The court noted discrepancies in the timing and logistical feasibility of unloading and re-weighing the truck carrying the CMR which suggested potential manipulation of records.
The dispute arose after the District Coordination Committee recommended blacklisting Acharya’s mill for non-compliance which led to the order from the District Supply Officer, Bhandara. Despite Acharya’s defence that the CMR had been deposited as per the records, the court found insufficient grounds to overturn the blacklisting decision.
“As per standard procedure, the rice miller used to deposit the CMR in the warehouse, which was duly checked by the quality control department and then it was forwarded to the government godown. It is apparent that in connivance with the godown manager, the goods were directly sent to Mumbai by the same truck. The act of the petitioner of not depositing the CMR within the stipulated period, and facilitating to directly forward the CMR to Mumbai itself violates Clause 121 of the agreement,” Justice Vinay Joshi and Justice M S Jawalkar stated in the order and dismissed Acharya’s contention that the authorities lacked the jurisdiction to impose such punitive measures.
Adv A M Ghare represented the petitioner while AGP N R Patil for respondents.
