Disposed

Loknete Baburao Patil Agro Ind. Ltd, through Chief Executive Officer, Sharad Suryabhan Belhekar v. the Chief Director, Directorate of Sugar, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Public Distribution and Ors.

Bombay HC3 Sept 2015WP/1961/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court recorded that petitioners accepted liability to deliver levy sugar. Directions Union of India to extend validity period. Petitioners allowed to file fresh petition if UOI fails to take levy or pay price by October 13, 2015 Writ petitions disposed on these terms.

What did the court decide?

Extended validity period till October 13, 2015. Petitioners permitted to file fresh petition for relief if UOI fails to take levy sugar or pay price by that date.

Loknete Baburao Patil Agro Ind. Ltd, through Chief… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2015)

wp1961-7400

ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION
 WRIT PETITION NO.1961 OF 2013 WITH
 WRIT PETITION NO.7400 OF 2013

¶5

Loknete Baburao Patil Agro Ind.Ltd ...Petitioner
 (in both petitions)
vs.
The Chief Director,
Directorate of Sugar & anr. ...Respondents
 (in both petitions)

¶6

Mr.Abhijit P. Kulkarni for the Petitioner in both
the petitions

¶7

Mr.D.P.Singh, Shri A.M.Sethna and Mr.Parag Vyas for
the respondent No.1-UOI in both the petitions
Mr.V.P.Malvankar, AGP `A' Panel for respondent No.2
in W.P.No.1961/2013 and for respondent Nos.2 to 5 in
W.P.No.7400/2013

¶8

CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
 V.L.ACHLIYA, JJ.
 DATE : SEPTEMBER 3, 2015

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1We have perused the order dated 18th May 2015
passed by the Chief Director (Sugar), Directorate of
Sugar, New Delhi in terms of the interim order
passed by this Court. As per the said order, the
obligation of the petitioners is to deliver quantity
1459.17 M.T for 2011-2012 season. The learned
counsel for the petitioners has placed on record a
letter dated 30thJuly 2015 (marked `Y' for
identification) addressed to him by the petitioner.
For the reasons stated in the said letter, the
petitioners have accepted the liability and have
agreed to deliver the requisite quantity of levy

¶11

wp1961-7400

¶12

¶13

sugar as per the aforesaid order.

¶14

2The learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that in breach of the ad-interim order passed by
this Court, a prosecution was launched by the
respondents on the ground of non supply of levy
sugar by the petitioners. He submits that a Criminal
Writ Petition No.1029 of 2014 has been filed by the
petitioners in this Court for quashing. His
submission is that as readiness is shown by the
petitioners to supply requisite quantity of the levy
sugar in terms of the order passed by the Chief
Director (Sugar), Directorate of Sugar, New Delhi,
the respondents should agree for quashing the
prosecution.

¶15

3Though the learned counsel for the Union of
India expressed inability to give such consent,
apart from the issue of breach of ad-interim order
of this Court, the conduct of the petitioners of
submitting to the order passed by the Chief Director
(Sugar) is bound to be considered by the concerned
Court while dealing with the said Writ Petition.

¶16

4As the petitioners have offered to supply the
levy sugar of requisite quantity, the Union of India
will have to extend validity period.

¶17

5At this stage, the learned counsel for the
Union of India has tendered across the bar the order
dated 2nd September 2015 by which the validity period
has been extended till 13th October 2015. The said

¶18

3 wp1961-7400

¶19

order is taken on record and marked `Z' for
identification.

¶20

6In view of the above discussion, we dispose of
the petition by passing the following order:

¶21

(I) We accept the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners on instructions that the petitioners are willing to supply levy sugar of quantity of 1459.17 M.T for 2011-2012 sugar season;

¶22

(II)If on or before 13th October 2015, the Union
of India fails to take necessary steps by
taking levy sugar and by paying the price to
the petitioners, it will be open for the
petitioners to file a fresh petition in this
Court for claiming appropriate relief;

¶23

(III)Writ Petitions are disposed of on above
terms.

¶24

wp1961-7400

¶25

¶26

Certified to be true and correct copy of original
signed Judgment/Order.

Loknete Baburao Patil Agro Ind. Ltd, through Chief Executive Officer, Sharad Suryabhan Belhekar v. the Chief Director, Directorate of Sugar, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Public Distribution and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Loknete Baburao Patil Agro Ind. Ltd, through Chief Executive Officer, Sharad Suryabhan Belhekar v. the Chief Director, Directorate of Sugar, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Public Distribution and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tata Housing Development Company Ltd.and Anr. Vs the Mun.Corpn.of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

Mumtaz Ahmed Khan Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and Anr.

Bhagvatiben Panchal and 14 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 6 Ors. and Zeenat S.Supriwal and Anr. (Applicants)

Vijay Sugar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Loknete Baburao Patil Agro Ind. Ltd. Vs the Chief Director, and Ors.

Rajendra Yashwant Tonape and Ors. Vs the Collector and Land Acquisition Officer NO.1, Kolhapur and Ors.