Dismissed

M/s. The Jeypore Sugar Company Limited, v. Union of India

Telangana HC15 Feb 2012WP/21866/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a declaration regarding the right to sell free sale sugar stocks. The court held that the substantive claim was remote as the interim order permitting such sales had been executed. The petitioner also sought protection against penal proceedings, which the court affirmed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. The respondents shall not initiate penal proceedings for the sale of free sale sugar manufactured during the 2006-2007 season.

M/s. The Jeypore Sugar Company Limited, Vs Union of… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA

¶2

WRIT PETITION No. 21866 OF 2006 .

¶3

DATED 15^th February, 2012

¶4

BETWEEN

¶5

M/s. The Jyepore Sugar Company Limited, Chennai Rep. by its Director Y.S.Durga Prasad and anr

¶6

…Petitioners

¶7

And

¶8

Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs & Public Distribution (Department of Sugar & Edible Oils) New Delhi and ors

¶9

….Respondents.

¶10

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA

¶11

WRIT PETITION No. 21866 of 2006

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action on the part of the respondents in applying Clause 4 of the Sugar (Control) Order, 1966 and Section 3D of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 to the entire sugar

¶14

produced by the petitioners. The petitioners have prayed for a declaration that the petitioner-company is entitled to sell its free sale sugar stocks manufactured during the seasonal year 2006-2007.

¶15

This Court while admitting the Writ Petition on 23.10.2006, granted interim order directing the respondents to permit the petitioner company to sell its free sale sugar stock manufactured during the seasonal year 2006-2007 to discharge its contractual and statutory liability, subject to the condition that the petitioner-company clears the dues payable to the farmers for the sugar cane crop of the previous year and the for the present crop as well as other statutory dues. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that in pursuance of the aforesaid interim order, the petitioner-company had sold out free sale sugar manufactured during the seasonal sugar year 20062007. He further submitted that since the seasonal year 2006-2007 has already been elapsed long back and the petitioner had sold out the free sale sugar manufactured by it for the said seasonal year, nothing survives in the Writ Petition and therefore the same may be dismissed as infructuous. Further, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

¶16

respondents be restrained from initiating any penal proceedings against the petitioner-company for having sold the free sale sugar in pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court.

¶17

The learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that as the petitioner company had already sold the free sale sugar manufactured during the seasonal year 2006-2007 pursuant to the interim order of this Court, no proceedings as alleged by the petitioner company would be initiated for the said period and that no further directions be issued as to initiation or not initiation of proceedings for the other seasonal years.

¶18

After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that as the petitioner had sold out the free sale sugar manufactured during the seasonal year 2006-2007 pursuant to the interim order of this Court, therefore, this Writ Petition has been rendered infructuous. However, the respondents shall not initiate any penal proceedings against the petitioner company for the sale of the free sale sugar manufactured during the seasonal year 2006-2007.

¶19

The Writ Petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶20

JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA

¶21

Dated 15^th February, 2012 Msnro

M/s. The Jeypore Sugar Company Limited, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. The Jeypore Sugar Company Limited, v. Union of India

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

U. Jagadish Prasad Vs The Joint Collector

Nallu Rajiv Srinivas Vs The Regional Passport officer, Clock Tower

M/s.Shouri Engineering Enterprises, Authorized dealer Vs The Chief Executive officer,Secunderabad Cantonment

Sri Laxmi engineering Company Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, Irrigation and Command Area

M/s. Sainath Estates Pvt. Limited Vs The Government of A.P.

Sri T. Hari Prasad, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh