Chattisgarh High Court
Lauh Purush Sardar Vallabh Bhai ... vs Union Of India on 18 November, 2021
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
W.P.(C) No. 3881 of 2021
Lauh Purush Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel Sahakari Sugar Karkhana Maryadit Pandariya
(A Registered Co-Operative Society) Through Managing Director Sateesh Kumar
Patley S/o Shri Aatma Ram Patley, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Sodhar,
Dharampur, Mungeli Tahsil And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through Secretary, Ministry Of Consumer Affairs, Food And Public
Distribution (Department Of Sugar And Vegetable Oils), Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi, Pin
110001, District : New Delhi, Delhi
2. Joint Secretary (Sugar), Ministry Of Consumer Affairs, Food And Public Distribution
(Department Of Sugar And Vegetable Oils,) Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi, Pin 110001,
District : New Delhi, Delhi
3. Chief Director (Sugar) Ministry Of Consumer Affairs, Food And Public Distribution
(Department Of Sugar And Vegetable Oils), Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi, Pin 110001,
District : New Delhi, Delhi
4. Sugarcane Commissioner, Ministry Of Agriculture And Science Raipur, Krishi Vikas
Bhawan Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
18/11/2021 Shri Apoorva Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Tushar Dhar Diwan, Advocate on behalf of Shri Ramakant
Mishra, Assistant Solicitor General for Union of India.
Heard.
It is submitted that the petitioner is a registered society engaged in
the enterprise of manufacturing white/ refined sugar. The petition has
been filed challenging the orders passed by the respondent authorities for
the financial years 2018-2019 & 2019-2020 dated 30.7.2020, 31.8.2020,
28.9.2020, 29.10.2020, 27.11.2020, 30.12.2020 and for regulating the
current financial year i.e. 2021-2021 dated 28.1.2021, 26.2.2021,
31.3.2021, 26.4.2021, 31.5.2021, 29.6.2021, 29.7.2021 and 27.8.2021
with respective restrictive quantity charts, regulating the price of sugar and
quota of sugar, which may be sold every month. The impugned orders are
arbitrary, illogical, impulsive and whimsical. Because of the impugned
orders, the petitioner/ institution has suffered loss. The petitioner has
stock of sugar of more than one lakh tonnes having value of more than
Rs.32 crores, which the petitioner is unable to sell out because of the
arbitrary action of the respondent/ authority.
It is further submitted that the petitioner in the financial year 2020-
2021, had made purchase of sugarcane from 6877 registered farmers.
After making partial payment of the price of the sugarcane, Rs.26.08
crores is outstanding for payment to the farmers. The situation is going to
be volatile because of the unrest between the farmers. The
representations made by the petitioner to the respondent authorities have
not been considered at all. Hence, this petition has been filed and it is
prayed that during the pendency of the present writ petition, the orders of
the respondent authorities restricting the sale of sugar may be stayed.
Reliance has been placed on the judgment of this High Court in the
case of Bhoramdev Sahakari Sugar Utpadak Karkhana Maryadit
Kawardha vs. Union of India & Ors., in W.P.(C) No. 1559 of 2020 dated
13.8.2020.
Learned counsel for the respondent authorities opposes the
submissions and submits that the impugned orders have been passed in
the interest of the farmers and for the purpose of restricting entry of big
players. The respondent authorities have the power to regulate the price,
influx and efflux of the manufactured products, therefore, any order
granting stay would not be in the interest of justice and also in the interest
of persons unconcerned. Hence, the interim prayer made by the
petitioner be rejected.
In reply, it is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the
Telangana High Court in W.P.(C) No. 11186 of 2019 had ordered that
permitting the petitioner establishment to sell the sugar stock to some
extent as an interim measure, therefore, similar order may be passed. It
is also submitted that this Court in the case of Bhoramdev Sahakari
Sugar Utpadak Karkhana Maryadit Kawardha (supra) has passed
similar order, therefore, as an interim measure, the petitioner may be
granted permission to sell out some of the stock of sugar which may be
sufficient to make payment to the farmers who have sold the sugarcane to
the petitioner and not received the price for the same.
Considered on the submissions. Perused the documents filed
alongwith the petition. From the submissions made, it appears that crises
has come up which is going to lead unrest for the farmers for the reason
that the price of the sugarcane purchased from them is unpaid from the
petitioner's side. As per the submissions, the petitioner institution has a
stock of sugar of worth Rs.32.17 crores. Without making any comment on
the legality of the impugned orders, this Court can pass the order only as
an interim measure to grant the interim relief to the petitioner and this
relief would be in fact relief to the farmers, who are waiting for the
payment of the price of sugarcane sold to the petitioner. Hence, on the
basis of this observation, as an interim measure, the petitioner is granted
permission to make sale of sugar stock worth Rs.20 crores only and the
sale proceeds so received are to be directly utilized for making payment to
the farmers whose dues are outstanding.
With the aforesaid observation, the application making prayer for
interim relief is allowed on conditions mentioned herein-above.
The respondent/ counsel granted time to file reply.
List this case after four weeks.
Sd/-
(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant)
Judge
Nimmi
