M/S Infra Agro Technologies vs. The Commissioner And Director Of Agriculture
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Infra Agro Technologies, filed a writ petition challenging the respondent's interference with their business of manufacturing, selling, and supplying biotech products. The petitioner argued that this interference occurred without proper sampling and analysis of their products, contrary to previous High Court orders and their GST registration obtained on April 16, 2021. The respondent, the Commissioner and Director of Agriculture, contended that the petitioner needed to comply with specific clauses of a Government of India order dated February 23, 2021, regarding bio-stimulants, and obtain a provisional certificate of registration before manufacturing and distributing their products. The petitioner sought a direction to restrain the respondents from interfering with their business.
Held
The Court noted that the statutory regime in force, consequent to the Government of India Order dated February 23, 2021, is not disputed and is in the best interest of farmers and the public, making its compliance mandatory. The Court acknowledged that the petitioner's counsel sought leave to make applications in compliance with the requirements of the Government of India Order. Consequently, the Writ Petitions were disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioners to make applications in compliance with Clause 5 of the Government of India Order dated February 23, 2021, within two weeks. The competent authority was directed to process these applications and issue a provisional Certificate of Registration within four weeks if satisfied. The Court clarified that the competent authority is entitled to collect samples and test product compatibility before granting the certificate. Until the process is completed, subject to the petitioners submitting applications within the stipulated time and in compliance with Clause 5, the petitioners are entitled to manufacture and distribute as contemplated by Clause 4 of the order. However, the competent authority retains the right to verify compliance and take action as warranted by law.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondent authorities are legally justified in interfering with the petitioner's business of manufacturing, sale, and supply of biotech products without following the prescribed procedure of collecting samples for analysis, as mandated by previous High Court orders and principles of natural justice? (Question of law and fact, turning on the interpretation and application of previous High Court orders and principles of natural justice). Petitioner's contention: The respondent's actions are arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, as well as principles of natural justice, and contrary to the High Court's orders in W.P. No. 19551 of 2007 and batch. They argue that their GST registration should permit their business operations. Respondent's contention: The petitioner must comply with Clauses 4 to 6 of the Government of India Order dated February 23, 2021, and obtain a provisional certificate of registration. They claim the petitioner's products fall under bio-stimulants and require analysis and compliance with the said order before manufacturing and distribution can proceed. They rely on the Government of India Order dated February 23, 2021.
Sections Cited
Section 5, Section 6
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.31 343 of 2O2L ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed with the following prayer: "For the reasons stated in the accompanging affi.dauit, it is therefore praged that this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice, be pleased lo issue an order or direction more partianlarlg one in the nature of Wit of MANDAMUS declaing the action of the respondents in interfeing tuith the petitioner's business of manufacture, sale and supply of Biotech products utithout receiuing the samples of 5 Kgs of product dealt by the petitioner to get the analysis from the suitable laboratory in terms of tlte order passed bg the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.No.19551 of 2O07 and batch dated 14.9.2007 though the petitioner has obtained GST Registration Certificate uide TIN No. 36ATNPKOO54A1Z4 dated 16.04.202 1 from the GST Registertng Authority is arbitrary, illegol and uiolatiue of Art 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and uiolatiue of Principles of Natural Justice and also contrary to the orders passed by the Honble High Court in W.P.No.19551 of 2007 and batch and consequently declare that the petitioner is entitled to sale and supply of Biotech products in the premises bearing Regd Office and Godoutn at D.No.6-128 Malkapuram Grarnam, Chotuppal Manda| Yadadri Bhuuanagii Distict, Telangana State, utithout reference to Memo No.ll(l) 2085/2006 dated 20.6.2006 issued by the first respondent by extending the benefit of orders dated 16.7.2010 and pctss such other and further order or orders as lhis Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstantce s of the case".
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Agricult.ure appearing for respondents. i
2
With tht consent of the learned counsel on elther side, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
Counsel on both sides submit that the issue raised in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.48 < f 2027 and batch clated OZ .Og.2O2I.
In view c' the same, and for reasons alike, the present Writ Petition is dis rosed of directing the respondents to follow the directions contr .ined in the order datcd 07.09.2O2 1 in W.p. No.4g of 2O2l and bar lh. No costs. 6 Conseque ttly, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed //// To, tMP MMA .I.NAGALAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Qt SECTION OFFICER
The Commission, rr and Director of Agriculture, Government of Telangana, Gun Foundry, Hyderat ad.
One CC to Sri K. )atyanarayana Murthy, Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCs to GF for Agriculture, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. IOUT
Two CD Copies.
One Spare Copy. Along with a Cof y of the Order dated 07.09.2021 in W.P.No.4B of 2021 and Batch. I / I
HIGH COURT DATED:01 112t2021 ORDER WP.No.31343 tt 2021 DISPOSING O: THE WRIT PETITION WTTHOUT COIiTS .{: 1 -* o ,l ),(' o )'^ Jt, \:' 2 1 rlrc 20pJ \ I
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION Nos. 44.277 144A9. 14495. L4497, 14518 1981 6 & 210ss ol 2O2l COMMON ORDER Heard Mrs.B.V.Aparna Lakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.Nos.48, 277, t44A9, A4gS, 14497, l451g & 19816 of 2O2 1, Sri Panga Sivanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.2lO55 ol 2O2l and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture & Cooperation.
In all these writ petitions, petitioners claim to be engaged in the business of manufacturing, sale and distribution of bio- products, with individual names assigned to the products manufactured by them. According to petitioners, these bio- products are manufactured without using toxic chemicals; they enrich the soil; ensure protection of plants/crops from viral, bacterial, fungus and other infections, besides being useful for getting more produce of the crop. According to petitioners, these products are not covered under the Insecticides Act, 1968 and the Fertilizers Control (Order) Act, 1985. It is the further case of the petitioners that the bio-products manufactured and marketed by them contaihs See-Weed extract, Amino Acid, Press mud, Soil Conditioner, Organic Nutrients, Humic Acid, Fulvic Acid, Protein Hydrolysates, Gypsum, Plant extracts, Tulasi Water Extract, Soya bean extract and Egg Shell. Petitioners claim that these ingredients are sourced from principal manufactures, blended in stirrer with Acetone as Solvents and blended in water, and then whole liquid is filtered and packed in HDPE containers. The percentage of the ingredients will vary from one recommended crop to another -2-
3- recommende I crop. These are the ingredients which develop high cellulose an, I resistance po!'lr/er in the plants. Petitioners also furnished ad, lresses of the units in which manufacturing activity is taken up. Acr ording to petitioners, though they have complied with all the statu ory requirements and the products are purely bio- products, wit rout using pesticides, the respondent authorities are harassing ar I intimidating the employees and preventing them from manufa :turing and marketing the products, causing lot of hardship and suffering to the petitioners.
By pla:ing reiiance on the decision of this Court in W,P.No.2529i of 2OI4 and batch, dated 10.07.2015, the decision of the Divisio I Bench, in W.A.Nos. 1 I22 and 1 136 of 20 16, dated 03.11.2016, r nd the directions issued by learned single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.98Ol of 2O2O and batch, on 05.08.2020, learned Coun ,e1 Mrs B.V,Aparna Lakshmi, would contend that the unnecessary nterference and disturbance to the manufacturing ex-facie lllegal, authority and and distribut on activity of the petitioners is amounts to arbitrary exercise of power and discriminatorl .
Learned Assistant Government Pleader sought to contend that petitioner s are required to comply with Clauses 4 to 6 of the order dated 2: .O2.2O27 of the Government of India, and only after a provisional ( :ertiftcate of Registration is issued to them, they are entitled to ca 'ryon the manufacturing and distribution of bio- products. He further submits that Part-'C' of the said order prescribes pro, edure for drawal of samples of bio-stimular-rts and if appropriate a1 plication is made by specifying all the details as required by tt e order, the competent authority shall collect the -4- samples, verify the nature of manufacturing activity and then only they will process the application for grant of provisional Certificate and the petitioners should cooperate with the competent authoritv in undertaking the exercise
It is his further contention that in view of the order dated 23.O2.2O21, of the Government of India, there is compliance of the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court and petitioners are required to comply with the mandate of the order dated 23.02.2027 of the Government of India. Unless and until, petitioners comply with the requirements of the said order, they are not entitled to undertake manufacture and distribution of bio- products.
According to respondents, petitioners, firms were illegally manufacturing harmful products without giving intimation to the Commissioner & Director of Agriculture. Until analysis of the product with respect to ingredients is disclosed, petitioners cannot claim that their products are without toxic chemicals. The bio- products stated to have been manufactured by the petitioners are covered by the notification relating to bio-stimulants, issued by the Government of India on 23.02.2021 . Unless, petitioners comply with the said order of the Government of India, they are not entitled to carryon manufacturing and distribution of the bio_ products.
The statutory regime as now in force, consequent to the order dated 23.O2.2O21 of Government of India is not disputed. This regime is in the best interest of farmers and is in larger public interest. Therefore its compliance is mandatory. Learned counsel
5 for the petiti rners sought to contend that as required by Clauses 51 and 62 o the order dated 23.02.2021 ' since petitioners have submitted a rplications for issuance of provisional Certificate ol Registration, they are entitied to carryon manufacturing and distribution of bio-products. The products manufactured and distributed ly them do satisfy the status of bio-stimulants and therefore, th:re cannot be any restriction in manufacturing and distribution , ,f their bio-products
Along vith the reply affidavit in few of the writ petitions, the representati( ns made to the Commissioner and Director for Agriculture, rre enclosed. g. Since, admittedly, sofar, applications in compliance with Ciauses 4 to 6 of the Government of India Order dated '23 'O2 '2021 are not madr and the issue is at the stage of consideration of such applications, if any, submitted, the Court is not expressing any opinion on respective submissions regarding the status of petitioners' p roducts as being called as bio-products/ bio-nutrients, to manufact rre and distribute without any hindrance created by the responde rt authorities.
Havin6 realized that there is no valid compliance of the order dated23.02.2O2loftheGovernmentoflndia,learnedcounselfor the petitione rs seeks leave of the Court to make applications in t Clause 5: The n anufacturer referred to in sub-clause (4) shall' within a period ofsix months. from the date of ublication of this order. submit an application to the controller for grant of provisional registr' tiort in Form C-l along with - ' (u) d",ui-I. o the product' its speJifications' label and sueh other panicLrlars as nlay be rcquired: (b) a cenitic te issued by the State Governmeut in Form G-2 to the el lect thal - iij *,. ptoat ;t is available in the narkct prior to the publication ol'the said orderl and iii) no inciOe ( has come to its notice about harmful effect ofthe product' 2 Clause 6; on re eipt of an application urrder sub-clause (5) lbr provisional registratio[' the controller shall, I y an order in writing, grant a provisional certificate of regrstration of bio- stimulant in Form i-3. -6- compliance of the requirements of the order of the Government of India, 1 1. In view thereof, the Writ petitions are disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioners to make applications in compliance with the requirement ol Clause 5 of the order of the Government of India, bearing No.S.O.882 (E), dated 23.02.2021, within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If such applications are made u,ithin the time stipulated above, the competent authority shall process the same and if satisfied, to issue provisional Certificate of Registration in Form G-3, within four (4) weeks thereafter.
It is made clear that the competent authority is entitled to collect samples in compliance of part_,C, of the order dated 23.02.2021 and test the compatibility of the products meeting the parameters to be marketed as bio_nutrients, before granting the provisional certificate of Registration. It is in the public interest to ensure that a product to be produced and marketed as a bio_ nutrients with the object of helping the farmer to develop high cellulose and resistance power in the plants meets the parameters to qualify as a bio-nutrient. The petitioners shall cooperate in drawing the samples. Until the exercise as directed above, is completed, subject ofcourse to petitioners submitting applications within the time stipulated above and in compliance of requirements of Clause 5 of the order dated 23.02.2021 of the Government of India, petitioners are entitled to manufacture and distribute as contemplated by Clause 4 of the order dated 23.02.2021. However, it is always open to the competent authority
.,7 to verify whet ler the products manufactured and distributed by the petitioners are in compliance with the statutory requirements and take act on as warranted by 1aw. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if an r, shall stand closed. P.NAVEEN RAO,J 7n September 2O2 1 Nale: lssue CC in one 1l) ,!r'eek B/o Rds/t/r
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.