Full Text
REGD. No. D. L.-33004/99
The Gazette of India
CG-WB-E-04062025-263605
EXTRAORDINARY
PART II-Section 3-Sub-section (ii)
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
No. 2419]
NEW DELHI, TUESDAY, JUNE 3, 2025/JYAISTHA 13, 1947
MINISTRY OF TEXTILES
(Office of the Jute Commissioner)
ORDER
Kolkata, the 26th May, 2025
S.O. 2478(E). This is pursuant to the hearing notice against M/s Daaksh Jute LLP. under
Ref No. Jute(T)-6/1/178/HAFED/2017-I(E) dated 22nd May 2025, today hearing of the instant matter was scheduled on
03:30 PM.
Subsequently, vide letter under Ref No. Jute(T)-6/1/178/HAFED/2017-I(E) dated 26.05.2025 the hearing was
proponed to 12:30 PM due to exigency of the adjudicating authority.
The alleged mill company reciprocated and appeared before adjudicating authority at 01:00 PM.
The department was led by Sh. Neeraj Kulhari, Dy. Jute Commissioner and was also represented by Sh. S.
Datta (Assistant Director, JM) and Sh. S. Chatterjee (Law Officer) and the alleged mill company was represented by
Sh. Mukul Mohan Mall (Director/Partner).
The attendance of all the participants is taken on record.
The allegation levelled by the department is that the mill company has been found to be allegedly mixing Red
striped bags mixed with Blue striped bags, and tghe same has surfaced in a recently held joint inspection at the consignee
endon 27.02.2025, which has been held in response to a complaint lodged by the consignee (i.e. HAFED) against
supplies made by the alleged jute mill vide PCSO No. HRHFR171224DJL35117 dated 17.12.2024.
JI in terms of statue was conducted on 27.02.2025. In the said JI, it was discovered that the alleged mill
company has supplied Red striped bags mixed with Blue striped bags.
It is needless to mention that the stripes in the manufactured B-Twill bags are as per BIS standard.
The department placed JI report in front of the adjudicating authority which is taken on record.
Sh. Mukul Mohan Mall appearing on behalf of the alleged mill company and prima facie admits as it levelled
in the JI report. However, he argued and submitted a supporting video graphic representation that the Joint Inspection
has been held at the consignee end in darkness, and the findings of the joint inspection, limited to colour coding of the
bags (i.e. differentiating between Red or Blue) may be misleading in the darkness. To substantiate his submissions he
also mentioned that the authorised representative of the jute mill company had pointed out the same on the spot during
the course of the JI by making his submissions in the JI report as a mark of protest. A copy of the JI report dated
27.02.2025 is kept on record.
He also argued that there is no reported evidence of bale tampering in the JI report. Further, he submits that
there is neither any complaint regarding the quality of the jute bags, and as such, the allegation of deliberate commitment
of unfair practices is unfounded. He however submits that if at all any wrongly (colour) coded bags are sent, the same
is unintentional, and there is no mala-fide intention or deliberate attempt in mixing such bags.
Further, Sh. Mall argued that there is no recorded precedence of commitment of unfair practices by his jute
mill company in the past. Accordingly, on behalf of the jute mill company he prayed for an opportunity to replace any
and all defective bags at the consignee end.
In further opposition to the submissions advanced by the alleged jute mill company, the department pressed
for punishment against the answering respondent in terms of the relevant provisions of the Jute & Jute Textiles Control
Order, 2016, since there is admission of guilt.
I have heard all the parties in length.
The alleged mill company is ordered to replace any and all defective bales lying at the consignee end at their
own risk and cost within 30 days from the date of issue of this order, and submit a compliance report to the department
within another 7 days including documentary proof of acceptance of the goods by the consignee, failing which necessary
recovery of equivalent cost of rejected bales should be initiated by the department from the pending bills for payment
pertaining to the alleged mill company coy.
The alleged mill company is warned from any unintentional/ intentional anomalies in future which will be
strictly dealt with.
I have heard the parties and findings with reasoned order is noted here in above.
The parties are ordered to act accordingly.
The matter is disposed.
Let this Order be circulated to all the parties' forthwith.
[F. No. Jute(T)-6/1/178/GN(19)/2019-I(E)]
MOLOY CHANDAN CHAKRABORTTY, Jute Commissioner
Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064
and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.