Dismissed

S.Rengaraj, v. the Commissioner of Sugar and

Madras HC12 Feb 2014WA(MD)/164/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal challenged a order awarding interest on susecane dues. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that interest claims involve factual disputes unsuitable for judicial review and that the lower authorities had acted within the scope of Clause 3A of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal filed against the order granting interest on belated payment was dismissed.

S.Rengaraj, Vs the Commissioner of Sugar and — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.02.2014

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

¶5

Writ Appeal(MD) No.164 of 2014

¶6

and MP(MD)No.1 of 2014 against WP(MD)No.819 of 2008

¶7

S.Rengaraj

¶8

... Appellant/Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Commissioner of Sugar and Cane Commissioner, No.474, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.

¶11

2.Dharani Sugars and Chemicals Ltd., Represented by its Executive Director, Dharani Nagar 627 760, Sivagiri Taluk, Madurai District.

¶12

3.Chairman, Dharani Sugars and Chemicals Ltd., No.1, Venus Colony, 2^nd Street, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018.

¶13

4.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 17.08.2011 made in W.P.(MD) No.819 of 2008 on the file of this Court.

¶16

Prayer in WP(MD). 819/ 2008 :

¶17

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the 1st respondent in R.C.No.3919/Cane 1/2001 dated 05/05/2007 and quash the same as illegal and direct the respondents to dispose petitioner's grievances afresh and to pay my arrears within a time frame, either through 4th respondent or in person

¶18

For Appellant : Mr.F.X.Eugene For Respondents 2&3 : Mr.V..Bharathidasan For 4^th Respondent : Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian, Special Government Pleader.

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SUDHAKAR,J )

¶23

This writ appeal is directed against the order made in W.P. (MD) No.819 of 2008, dated 17.08.2011.

¶24

2.We find no merit in the writ appeal as the learned single Judge taking note of the proceedings of the first respondent namely, the Commissioner of Sugarcane has found that Clause 3A of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 on which reliance was placed by the appellant does not provide for the method for determination of interest on belated payment and what has been provided in the said clause is only the mode of recovery. The learned single Judge has also held that there is no justifiable reason pointed out as to how the calculation arrived at is bad in law. The learned single Judge also rejected the sole plea advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the District Collector was not consulted holding that it is misconceived in law.

¶25

3.We also noticed that the claim for interest has been considered by the authority in detail and granted. The grounds raised in the writ petition are factual disputes on the calculation of interest which cannot be gone into in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶26

4.In view of the above, the appellant has not made out a case before the learned single Judge for grant of the abovesaid relief. Accordingly, we find no merit in the writ appeal and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar(RTI)

¶29

/TRUE COPY/

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

¶32

1.The Commissioner of Sugar and Cane Commissioner,

¶33

No.474, Anna Salai,Nandanam,Chennai 600 035.

¶34

2.The District Collector,Tirunelveli District,Tirunelveli.

¶35

+1cc to Mr.V.Bharathidasan, Advocate SR.No.8976

¶36

+1cc to Mr.F.X.Eugene, Advocate SR.No.9489

¶37

+1cc to Special Govt.Pleader SR.No.9694

¶38

Writ Appeal(MD) No.164 of 2014 12.02.2014

¶39

sms

¶40

PA/03.03.2014/2P/6C

¶41

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Rengaraj, v. the Commissioner of Sugar and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Rengaraj, v. the Commissioner of Sugar and

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

M.Dharmaraj, Vs the Assistant Engineer

Hotel & Bar (FL3) Association Vs the Secretary to Govt.

K. Pandiarajan, Vs the District Collector

K.Muthusamy, Vs S.Ponmuthuramalingam

R.Indrani, Vs the District Cocllector

O.S.Masood Vs the Superintendent of Police