Allowed

M/s Kurnool Seeds Pvt. Limited v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC5 Dec 2012WP/37406/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the Writ Petition in part, directing the appellate authority to dispose of the pending appeal within eight weeks after giving a hearing to the petitioner. The impugned order cancelling the registration certificate was set aside pending the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition allowed in part; impugned order suspended; appeal to be disposed of within 8 weeks after providing hearing to the petitioner.

M/s Kurnool Seeds Pvt. Limited Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.37406 OF 2012

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed questioning the proceedings in S.R. Cell (2) 944/2011, dated 30.10.2012.

¶5

The petitioner is a Company engaged in the business of seeds. It is having licence to carry on the business as a dealer in seeds with sale premises at D.No.81/5A-2-3-II, Beside Sathya Sai Apartments, Raghavendranagar, Kurnool; sale, storage, processing and packing premises at Plot No.4, Phase-III, Behind N.S.C. Ltd., Industrial Estate, Kallur, Kurnool District and storage premises at Survey No.330, Shed Nos.1, 2 and 3, Ranga Pullareddy Godown, Bellary Road, Kurnool.

¶6

The Licensing Authority, in exercise of the powers under Seed (Control) Order, 1983 (for short, ‘Control Order’), alleging that the petitioner has stored expired seeds in its premises, has issued the impugned proceedings, dated 30.10.2012, in S.R.Cell (2) 944/2011, cancelling the certificate of registration of the petitioner. It is stated that as against the said order of the Licensing Authority, the petitioner filed an appeal, as provided under Clause 16 of the Control Order, before respondent No.2, which is pending.

¶7

In this Writ Petition, it is submitted by Sri S. Ramachander Rao, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, that as per the instructions issued in Memo No. S & HVP (4) 2087/97, dated 28.01.1997, from the office of the Commissioner & Director of Agriculture, Andhra Pradesh, expired seeds shall be stored only in the seed licence premises and such a storage cannot be construed as illegal. It is further submitted that though there is a provision for giving an opportunity of hearing, the primary authority has not given any such opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and passed the impugned order, and the same is in violation of the Control Order and also

¶8

principles of natural justice.

¶9

On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that the petitioner has already filed an appeal before respondent No.2 and in that view of the matter, the Writ Petition cannot be maintained at this point of time.

¶10

I have perused the copy of the impugned proceedings, cancelling the registration certificate of the petitioner and also the instructions issued from the office of the Commissioner & Director of Agriculture, dated 28.01.1997. A perusal of the said instructions, prima facie, indicates that there are instructions for storing the expired seeds only in the godowns mentioned in the seed licence.

¶11

As it is stated that such expired seeds are to be stored only in seed licence premises and further, as there is no material to show that such seeds are sold to third parties, it is a matter which is required to be considered by the appellate authority. In any event, when the Control Order itself provided an appeal, there is no reason for not passing orders either in the appeal or on the interim application filed by the affected parties, immediately.

¶12

Having regard to the grounds mentioned in the impugned proceedings for cancelling the registration certificate of the petitioner and in view of the grounds urged by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to the appellate authority – respondent No.2 herein, to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, under Clause 16 of the Control Order, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by issuing prior notice and by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the petitioner, if any. Further, the order of the Licensing Authority, dated

¶13

30.10.2012, issued in S.R.Cell (2) 944/2011, shall stand suspended till appropriate orders are passed in the appeal filed by the petitioner. It is needless to observe that the appellate authority shall examine all the grounds raised by the petitioner while disposing of the appeal.

¶14

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed in part to the extent indicated above. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. No costs.

¶15

________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J

¶16

December 05, 2012 MD

¶17

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

¶18

WRIT PETITION No.37406 OF 2012

¶19

December 05, 2012

¶20

M/s Kurnool Seeds Pvt. Limited v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Kurnool Seeds Pvt. Limited v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

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

Jonnabhatla Anjaneyulu, Vs The Depot Manager, Apsrtc Depot

Smt. Ghanta Radha, Vs The Deputy Registrar /

Rachuri Srinivasulu, Vs The Joint Collector

M/s Jairaj Ispat Limited, Vs The Central Power Distribution Company of

U. Naga Raju Vs The District Collector.

M/s Minopharm Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Managing Director