This order disposes of a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the 2nd Respondent's interference with bio-products sales illegal and to direct non-interference under the Insecticides Act and Fertilizers Control Act.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No. 4836 of 2020
O R D E R:
This Writ Petition is filed for the following relief:
“……to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in interfering with the sale and distribution of bio-products of petitioner-Firm i.e., Ammez, Amino Star, Ace95, Proton, Pushkar, Alga, Chitozin, A-Light, S-20 and Miracle Star, 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, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and further direct the 2nd respondent not to interfere with in any manner in the sale and distribution of bio-products including from the licensed premises of the dealers/stockists under the Insecticides Act, 1968 and the Fertilizers Control (Order) Act 1985….”
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Agriculture appearing for the respondents that the issue in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by the common order, dated 10.07.2015 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.25293 of 2014 and batch, as modified by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal Nos.1122 and 1136 of 2016 vide common judgment, dated 03.11.2016.
Relevant portion of the aforesaid common judgment, dated 03.11.2016 in Writ Appeal Nos.1122 and 1136 of 2016 is as under:
“While we are in complete agreement with the submission of Sri S. Niranjan Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-writ petitioner, that there cannot be an omnibus
2
categorization, of all bio-products as insecticides, for the purpose of taking action under the Act, the grounds on which the Insecticide Inspector has reason to believe, that insecticides are being sold in contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Rules, would depend upon the facts of each case, and cannot be circumscribed by way of guidelines issued by this Court. The guidelines prescribed, in the order under appeal, can only supplement and not supplant the law, and would remain in force only till appropriate legislation – either plenary or subordinate – is made in this regard. Suffice it, while making it clear that there cannot be an omnibus categorization of all bio-products as insecticides for taking action against the dealers of those goods, to also make it clear that the guidelines, prescribed in the order under appeal, shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of, the powers conferred on the concerned authorities under the Act and the Rules. We may not be understood to have expressed any opinion on whether or not any of these bio-products are insecticides, as these are matters which the authorities concerned are required to examine in accordance with the provisions of the Act, the Rules made thereunder, and the guidelines stipulated in the order under appeal.
The order under appeal is modified to the extent indicated hereinabove, and the Writ Appeals are disposed of accordingly.”
Following the aforesaid judgments and for the reasons stated therein, this Writ Petition is also disposed of in terms thereof.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition
shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
_________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J
kdl
Dt:04.03.2020
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the action of the 2nd Respondent in interfering with the sale and distribution of bio-products of the petitioner-Firm is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction
Ammez
Respondent
Challa Kodanda Ram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
