Dilip Gupta, J.— Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6-Cane Grower Cooperative Society of the area. Petitioners claim to be residents of village Mukundpur under Police Station Chhaprauli, Baghpat. They have preferred this writ petition against the appellate order passed by the State Government in exercise of powers under Section 15(4) of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). That order available as Annexure-4 to the writ petition discloses that on an appeal preferred by respondent No.5-SBEC Sugar Mill Ltd., Loyan, notices were issued to concerned parties and thereafter on the basis of consent of respondent No.4-DCM Sugar Works, Daurala, district Meerut, certain cane areas were shifted from reserved area of respondent No.4 to reserved area of respondent No.5. The petitioners have raised a grievance that they were not given notice and not heard in the matter. We find no merit in this claim because under the relevant Rule-22 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Rules, 1954, the Cane Commissioner while passing the initial order for reservation of cane area is required to ascertain the views of the Cane Growers Cooperative Society of the area. There is no requirement even at that stage to issue notice to individual farmers or ascertain their views. Hence there can be no such responsibility or liability upon the State Government while hearing the appeal under Section 15(4) of the Act to issue notice to individual farmers like the petitioners. Since the order of State Government is based on consent and the Cane Growers Cooperative Society has not raised any grievance before this Court, we find no merit in this writ petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed. _____________