M/S. Sri Arka Agro Sciences Private Limited vs. The State Of Telangana
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Sri Arka Agro Sciences Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging the action of the 2nd respondent (Commissioner and Director of Agriculture, State of Telangana) in interfering with the manufacturing, sale, and distribution of its bio-products/bio-stimulants. This interference was based on Memo No. PP.II(1)2085/2005 and Letter No. PP.II(1)2085/2005, both dated January 21, 2006. The petitioner claimed to be engaged in supplying bio-products without toxic chemicals and possessed a GST Registration Certificate. The impugned memos stated that these bio-products/bio-stimulants were not covered by the Insecticides Act, 1968, or the Fertilizer Control (Order) Act, 1985, and therefore, their stocking or sale from licensed premises would not be permitted. The petitioner highlighted that similar orders had been challenged in previous writ petitions, which were disposed of with modified directions by a Division Bench.
Held
The Court disposed of the Writ Petition with similar directions as in W.P.No.46844 of 2022. The reasoning was based on the confirmation by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture regarding the position taken in previous judicial pronouncements. The Court noted that the subject matter was covered by the common order in W.P.No.25293 of 2014 and batch, as modified by the Division Bench in W.A.Nos. 1122 and 1136 of 2016. The specific directions from W.P.No.46844 of 2022, which were adopted, involved granting liberty to the petitioners to make applications in compliance with Clause 5 of the Government of India's order dated February 23, 2021, within two weeks. The competent authority was directed to process these applications and issue provisional certificates of registration if satisfied. The competent authority was also entitled to collect samples and test product compatibility. Until the process was completed, subject to the petitioner submitting applications within the stipulated time and in compliance with requirements, the petitioners were entitled to manufacture and distribute their products. However, the competent authority retained the right to verify compliance and take action as warranted by law. No order as to costs was made.
Key Issues
1. Whether the action of the 2nd respondent in interfering with the manufacturing, sale, and distribution of the petitioner's bio-products/bio-stimulants, by issuing memos dated January 21, 2006, is illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional, especially in the absence of prescribed standards? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the respondent's action was illegal and arbitrary, particularly as there were no prescribed standards for these bio-products. They relied on previous orders from the High Court in similar matters, specifically mentioning W.P.No.25293 of 2014 & batch, and the subsequent modification by the Division Bench in W.A.No.1122 of 2016 & W.A.No.1136 of 2016. Respondents' contention: The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture confirmed the position stated by the petitioner, implying an agreement with the petitioner's reliance on previous judicial pronouncements.
Sections Cited
Insecticides Act, 1968, Fertilizer Control (Order) Act, 1985
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the bllowing: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION No.3352 of 2023 ORDER: This Writ Petition has been hled seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2"d respondent in interfering with the manufacturing, sale and distribution of bio-products/bio-stimulants of petitioner-company, by issuing Memo No.PP.ll(1)208512OO5, dated 21.01.2006 and Letter No. PP.II(1)208512OO5, dated 21.01.2006 as being illegal and arbitrary ald consequently to direct the 2nd respondent not to interfere with the manufacturing, sale and distribution of bio-products/bio-stimulants of petitioner- company and to pass such other order or orders.
Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petiton are that the petitioner-company ciaims to be engaged in the supply of bio-products/bio-stimulants without usage of \an\ toxic chemica,ls. He submitted that the petitioner- company has a-lso obtained GST Registration Certihcate
PM D,.l bearing No.! 1,.\BJCS8g68ClZT, dated :l8 ol l'1023' It is submitted t Lat vide letter dated 2L 01 '2Ot)6, thr: 2"d respondent 1 as issued proceedings, st:rtinu t har. the bio- products/bio sl,imulants are not covered b5' t:.,.r hrsecticides Act, 1968 or l[::e Fertilizer Control (Order) Act -9t'5 and the stocking, sto ing or the sale of the said pro<lr'rcts; from the licensed pren ises will not be permittcd, therelt r''::, the present writ petition s filed. Thereafter, several writ petitions \'rrere filed challeng ng the similar orders of the re:;l)ondents and this Court in zr number of writ petitions i e' in \V'P'No'25293 of 2014 & latch, Lrave disposed of the s;r:me and the Cirections v ore modified by the Divisit'::' l3ench in W.A.No.1 122 rf 2016 & W.A'No. i 13r> ol 2A16 dated 03.11.20 16. I: js further submitted that 1-ht: :opies of the above orders rre hled as pa-rt of the writ pirpers '
Learn rl Assistant Government Pleader 1i'r ligriculture has also conf rrne'd the said position
PMD,J
In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of with similar directions as in W.P.No.46844 of 2022. There shall be no order as to costs. Copy of the order in W.P.No.46844 of 2022 sha-tl be appended to this order. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. //// (Along with a copy of W.p.No.46844 ot 2022 to this order) .A.V.S.PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTFAR sECT|ON OFgncen To PSK. SW 1 . The Principal Secretary,-Agriculture and Co_operation Dept., Secretariat, ^ Hyderabad, State of T6iangana.
The Commissioner and D.irictor of Agriculture, State of Telangana, Opp. L.B. . Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, ietfi;;; SGiu.
Two ccs to Gp rodne dtc0llu-nE, i{,g'h d;;i;r the state of reransana, at Hyderabad. [OUT1 1. 9n" CC to M/s.-B.V.APARNA LAKSHM|, Advocate tOpUCl
Two CD Copies
ii I I I HIGH COUR'' DATE D : 1 3l0i'.12023 ORDER WP.No.3352,tf 2023 DISPOSING C F THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CO STS. \.. a i,, 1) t. 2 i t:rl ?Ul \,1 \., \.. ) 8,l) ,3 tu-lr- D i')
HONOURABLE SRI WSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY IPRIT PETITION No.46844 of 2022 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government pleader for Agriculture appearing for the respondents.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the common order passed by this Court in W.P.No.25293 of 2Ol4 and batch, dated 10.07.2015, as modified by the Division Bench in W.A.Nos. 1122 and' 1136 of 2016, dated 03.11.2O16. Further, this Court, while disposing of W.P.No.48 of 2O2l and batch vide common order dated OZ .O9 .2021, held as under:
"
In uiew thereof, the writ Petitiofts are dtsposed of, granting libertA to th.e petitioaers to make applications in conplia nce with the requirement of Clause 5 of the order of the Gouemm,ent of India, beaing N1.5.O.882(E), dated 23.02.2o21, uithin too (2) weeks from the date of receipt of copg of this order. If such applicatioas are made uithin the time stipulated dboue, the conpetent authority shall process the sqme and. if satisfied, to issue prouisional Ceftifrcate of Registtation in Fonn G 3, within four (4) ueeks th.ereafter.
It is made clear thot the cofitpetent authoitA is entitled to collect samples in compliance of Pafi''C' of the order dated 23.O2.2O21 dnd test the compatibihtA of the products meeting the paratueters to be markelecl as 2 I I'ii n irients before qranting the prouisiorurl Certilit:t. tc o,, l:.gi:tration- ft is in rh.r public itterest to e4sure t),et ( ,.r )dtLct to be_ procluced end marketed as a biallt rictt ',\Lh the ob.)ect of helping the famer to deuel<,yt higl :t'lulcse ancl resistancc power ln the plants fircet. th( .eratielers to qualifrl ds bio nutient. 'l he pct ll)ncft ;ltl-tll cooperotc in drautng the samples_ IJnLil the e ^( .cist is dtrected aboue, ts completed, subject of colLr:,e ta )<'tilit)ners :;ubmittirtg applications wtthin tfu: titu( ;li,tuldted alroue and tn compliance of re quiretn.,lt s oJ l'irruse 5 ctf the orcler datecl 23.02.2021 )-r the ioue, nment of India, petitioners are e\titied to t c nuftacture and dislibute as contempldted b.9 Clct.se 4 ,,' llu order date.l 23 O2.2O2j. Howeuer, i, is (ri.,,oy.s \)t'n Io the competent oulhontg to ueriflj uhetl <.1. the '1 ducts m.Lnufacturc onrl distnbuted bg rhe peti\o.Er.; ,rt ir comphance uith lhe statutory requiremen ! atld 1l\c oction a:; uarranted bA laLu.',
In 1 )r!:ns; of the afforested orders and for t ]C reilsons mentione tht:rein, this Writ petition is also disp,r,;ed of in terms the cof. There shall be no order as to costs.
As sequel thereto, misceilaneous petiticru;, il any pencting i this writ petition, shall stand closed. JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR F:EDD-r. Dated: A2. . .2023 Chs
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.