M/S. Nethra Enterprises Vs the Union of India

¶1

WP No.46720 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 27.01.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

¶6

W.P.No.46720 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos.52129 of 2025

¶7

M/S Nethra Enterprises Partnership firm Represented by its Authorised person S.H.Selvaraj, 1E1, 1E2, Thayir Ittery Raod, Kannapa Angar, Coimbatore – 641 027

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Union of India Represented by its Secretary Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers Department of Fertilizers

¶11

Sasthri Bhawan,

¶12

New Delhi – 110001

¶13

The Additional Secretary Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers Department of fertilizers Sasthri Bhawan

¶14

New Delhi – 110001

¶15

1/10

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

WP No.46720 of 2025

¶18

3. The Secretary

¶19

Department of Agriculture

¶20

The Government of Tamil Nadu

¶21

Chepauk,

¶22

Chennai 600 005

¶23

The Commissioner of Agriculture Department of Agriculture

¶24

The Government of Tamil Nadu

¶25

Chepauk,

¶26

Chennai – 600005 ... Respondents

¶27

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to take necessary steps for the release of raw materials by restoring the petitioner's access to the IFMS portal for the allotment of subsidized fertilizers.

¶28

For Petitioner : Mr. I.Abrar Mohamed Abdullah For Respondents-1 & 2 : Mr.K.R.Samratt, Senior Panel Counsel For Respondents - 3&4 : Mr. P.Muthukumar Additional Advocate General M/s. Anitha Special Government Pleader

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

The above Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief:

¶31

“to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents

¶32

2/10

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

WP No.46720 of 2025 to take necessary steps for the release of raw materials by

¶35

restoring the petitioner's access to the IFMS portal for the allotment of subsidized fertilizers.

¶36

It is the case of the petitioner that he is a licensed

¶37

fertilizer mixture manufacturer who had been blocked out from the IFMS

¶38

portal (Integrated Fertilizer Management System), which is the sole mode through which straight fertilizers are procured for the purpose of creating customized mixtures for independent agricultural requirements.

¶39

It is the further case of the petitioner that the IFMS is the centralized nationwide network that monitors the fertilizer supply chain from production to the end user via Point of Sale (POS) machines. The development, maintenance and control of the IFMS portal including the “Mixture Manufacturer Registration Module” is solely under the control of the Central government and it is the respondents who are the sole and ultimate authority to grant access or deny access to the IFMS system and to resolve any technical impediments. The state Government in turn, who is represented by respondents 3 and 4, functions as the primary implementing and regulatory authority at the State level. They are entrusted with the task of enforcement of the Fertilizer (Control) Order 1985 which includes 3/10

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

WP No.46720 of 2025 functions like issuing, renewing and suspending licenses for fertilizer mixture manufacturers within the State's jurisdiction. The Joint Directors of Agriculture (JDA) are required to conduct mandatory inspections and are vested with the authority to issue or cancel such licenses and initiate punitive action. The State-level Appellate authority is the Additional Director of Agriculture (Seeds) who is empowered to hear appeals and revoke license cancellations. In the IFMS system, the State Government acts as a mandatory liaison. Though the State Government has no control over the Central portal, however they are bound to verify the legitimacy of manufacturers and approve their raw materials allocations and thereafter communicate the same to the central Government.

¶42

The petitioner and similarly placed business entities are small and medium scale entrepreneurs engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling standard mixture fertilizers and operate under the license issued by the Government under the Fertilizer (Control) Order 1985. This model is fundamentally dependent on the Government's subsidy scheme as they procure primary raw materials to create customized mixtures as per the respective agricultural needs.

¶43

4/10

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶45

5.

¶46

WP No.46720 of 2025

¶47

1. The petitioner would submit that he and similarly placed

¶48

persons were given valid licences under the fertilizer control order for the manufacturer of mixture fertilizer and were given an identification number and password for access to the module. However, all of a sudden, without any explanation or reason, their access to the IFMS portal was locked out.

¶49

The petitioner would submit that they have been holding a licence for several years and are now being arbitrarily blocked out. During the current Rabi season September 2025, the petitioner and other units made a request for raw materials allocations. However, their request was not approved on the ground that in the earlier season, there was no usage of raw materials.

¶50

The petitioner would further submit that the IFMS module requires that the final approval has to be made by the State Government on or before 30 September for the Rabi season and 31 March for the Kharif season. After these dates, the IFMS system blocks access to the approval modules till the start of the next season. That apart, each authorized person has their Aadhaar and Biometric link to the system and only this authorized person can draw the raw material by using the POS machine. The petitioner would submit that when they had attempted to complete the POS transactions, the screen flashed a pop up error message stating “Sale to unregistered Mixture 5/10

¶51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶52

WP No.46720 of 2025 Manufacturer is not allowed ”. The petitioner would submit that by reason

¶53

of this, they are unable to run their unit. Therefore, the petitioner has come forward with the present in question.

¶54

7.Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶55

From the records, it is seen that the order of suspension issued to the petitioner has subsequently been revoked by proceedings dated 30.03.2024 wherein the following order has been passed.

¶56

fyit cu';fs; cw;gj;jp chpk';fs; 27/09/2023 md;W <nuhL.

¶57

ntshz;ik ,iz ,af;Feh ; chpkk ; tH';Fk ; mjpfhuk;

¶58

bgw;wtuhy; epue;jukhf ,uj;J bra;ag;gl;L ehsJ njjptiu

¶59

cu chpkk; ,uj;J bra;ag;gl;Ls;s epiyapnyna cs;sjhy;.

¶60

mjidna jz;lidf ; fhykhf fUjp <nuhL.

¶61

ntshz;ik ,iz ,af;Feuhy ; epWtdj;jpd ; cu

¶62

6/10

¶63

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶64

WP No.46720 of 2025 chpkk; ,uj;J bra;J Mizaplg;gl;l cj;jutpid jpUk;g

¶65

M/s.a[dpth;ry; bgh;l;oiyrh;!;. nfhgp epWtdj;jpd; 8 fyit

¶66

cu chpk';fs; kPjhd ,uj;J cj;jutpid kPs bgwg;gLfpwJ/

¶67

nkYk; ,r;bray;Kiw Miz fpilf;fg; bgw;w ehspypUe;J

¶68

fyit cuk; chpk';fis kPz;Lk; bray;ghl;ow;F bfhz;L

¶69

tu ,jd; K:yk; Mizaplg;gLfpwJ/”

¶70

It is evident from the records that similar relief has been granted to other licensees. The petitioner was denied access to the IFMS portal only on account of the suspension of his licence. Considering the fact that the order of suspension of the petitioner's licence has already been revoked, there is no impediment to once again permitting the petitioner to access the IFMS portal.

¶71