M/s. Margosa Biogrow (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Director of Agriculture

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY

WRIT PETITION No.33035 of 2016

ORDER:

1 This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in interfering with the manufacturing, sale and distribution of petitioner’s bio-products by issuing Memo No.PP.II(1)2085/2005, dated 21.01.2006 and Letter No.PP.II(1)2085/2005 dated 21.01.2006 as being illegal and arbitrary and further direct the respondent not to interfere with in any manner in the manufacturing, sale and distribution of bioproducts including the licensed premises of its dealers/stockists under the Insecticides Act, 1968 and the Fertilizers Control (Order) Act, 1985.

¶5

2 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Agriculture.

¶6

3 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the subject matter in this writ petition is squarely covered by the common order passed by this Court in W.P.No.25293 of 2014 and batch dated 10.07.2015. She further submitted that this Court followed the same decision in W.P.No.5374 of 2016. It is not the case of the respondent that the orders passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.25293 of 2014 and batch have been stayed or suspended as on today. Therefore, it is binding on the respondents.

¶7

4 Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in accordance with and in terms of the orders of this Court dated 10.07.2015 in W.P.No.25293 of 2014 and batch. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶8

Date: 28^th September, 2016 Kvsn

¶9

__________________________ T. SUNIL CHOWDARY, J_

M/s. Margosa Biogrow (India) Pvt. Ltd., v. The Director of Agriculture

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Margosa Biogrow (India) Pvt. Ltd., v. The Director of Agriculture

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Violet Pranaa Bio Sciences, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep its Principal Secretary

M/s. Margosa Biogrow (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Director of Agriculture

Ch.Yellaiah, Vs The State of Telangana

Pitchakuntla Mahipal Vs The State of Telangana

Yemmiganur Auto Workers Union, Vs A.P State Road transport Corporation Ltd,,.

Biotech International Ltd., Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh