Dismissed

The Government of India, rep. by its Secretary, v. M/s. Fertilizers and Pesticides Seeds Dealers Association

Telangana HC17 Oct 2022WA/739/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Appeal filed by the Government of India challenging a single judge order that struck down enhanced insecticide licence fees was disposed of by the High Court as the matter had become infructuous due to a subsequent order.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Appeal is dismissed as infructuous without costs. Pending miscellaneous applications in the appeal stand closed.

The Government of India, rep. by its Secretary… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

[^32e5 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT APPEAL NO: 739 OF 2009

¶8

Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent Appeal preferred against the order passed in W.P.No.2261 of 2000 dated 26.10.2007 on the file of the High Court.

¶9

Between:

¶10

The Government of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture & Corporation, Krushi Bhavan, New Delhi.

¶11

...APPELLANT

¶12

AND

¶13

M/s. Fertilizers & Pesticides Seeds Dealers Association, Hyderguda, Hyderabad, Rep by its Vice President Sri N.K.C.Sekhar Rao,

¶14

The Commissioner and Director of Agriculture, Government of A.P., L. B.Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.

¶15

Joint Director of Agriculture, Hyderabad.

¶16

Joint Director of Agriculture, R.R.District.

¶17

Joint Director of Agriculture, Medak District.

¶18

Joint Director of Agriculture, Mahaboobnagar District.

¶19

Joint Director of Agriculture, Nalgonda.

¶20

Joint Director of Agriculture, Karimnagar.

¶21

Joint Director of Agriculture, Khammam.

¶22

Joint Director of Agriculture, Nizamabad.

¶23

1 1 . Joint Director of Agriculture, Adllabad.

¶24

Joint Director of Agriculture, Chittoor.

¶25

Joint Director of Agriculture, Nellore.

¶26

14.Joint Director of Agriculture, Cuddapah.

¶27

1 5. Joint Director of Agriculture, Kurnool.

¶28

'16. Joint Director of Agriculture, Visakhapatnam.

¶29

Joint Director of , \griculture, Vizianagaram. 18. Joint Director of / \griculture, E.G.District. 19. Joint Director of r igriculture, W.G.District. 20. Joint Director of r,griculture, Krishna District. 21. Joint Director of Lgriculture, Guntur District. 22. Joint Director of I griculture, Prakasham District. 23. Joint Director of I griculture, Warangal District.

¶30

.. I:IES,PONDENTS

¶31

Counsel for the Appell, rnt:SRl B.MUKHERJEE AE. Counsel for the Resporrdent 1: I G.POORNA SREE FOR VEt)LrLA SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respor rdent 2 to 23: SRI GP FOR AGRICULTURI= The Court made the fol owing: JUDGMENT

¶32

I I

¶33

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

¶34

AND

¶35

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASXAR REDDY

¶36

WRIT APPEAL No.739 of 2OO9

¶37

JUDGMENT i^per the Hon'ble tlte Chief Justice rJjjat Bturyan)

¶38

Heard Mr. B.Mukherjee, learned counsel for the appellant; Ms. G.Poorna Sree, learned counsel representing Mr. Vedula Srinivas, learned counsel for respondent No. 1; and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture for respondent N<,rs.2 to 23.

¶39

On 29.O8.2O22, we had passed the follor,r,ing

¶40

order:-

¶41

"This writ appeal is directed against the common judgment and order dated 26.10.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing W.P.No.2261 of 2000 and other connected writ petitions.

¶42

¶43

The writ petitions were frled by respondent No.1 assailing the enhancement of licence fee from Rs.2O.OO to Rs.5O0.O0 per insecticide and from Rs.3O0.O0 to Rs.7,500.00 towards maximum licence fee, further requiring separate fee for different selling points and stock points of the same dealer as per the amended sub-rule (2) of Rule 1O of the Insecticides Rules, 1971, as amended in the year 1999.

¶44

iTC] & CVBRJ W.A I'1,t.71t9 of 2009

¶45

¶46

By tlre common order dated 26.10.2007, learned Single Judge caree to the conclusion that such enhalcement was hrghly exc essive, thus arbitrary and contrary to Serli,;n 36 of the Insecl rcides Act, 1968. Accordingiy, sub-rule tlll of Rule 10 of the lnsecticides Rules, 1999 was struck dowr, as ultra vires, fur her directing the appellant to strictly arlhere to Section 3( of the Insecticides Act, 1968.

¶47

Mr B.ll'lukherjee, learned counsel appearfurg for the appellant, : hall apprise the Court as to what has hapJrened to the related appeals and whether after striking dorvn Rltle I0(2) of the h-rst cticides Rules, 1971, as amended io 1999, any fresh/furth:r arnendment has been made in Rule 1,1(11) of the lnsecLicides Rules, 1971, as amended in 1999.

¶48

Lis rin 17 .1O.2022 under the sarne ca1;tion "infructuou s matters"."

¶49

Mr . B. Mukherjee, learned counsel €.ll pe€ring for the appellant submits that though he has wrilten to the appellarrt in t :rms of the order dated 29.08.2(\22',. he is yet to receive any in ;truction

¶50

Or the other hand, learned counsel lt,r' respondent No. 1 submits that the appeal has become infruc'-uous

¶51

Cc nsidering the order under apt)eal dated^t t 26.10.2017, trc are of the view that the appeal iras become \ infructuous

¶52

3 HCJ &, CVBRJ W.A.No.739 of 2OOa

¶53

Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed as

¶54

infructuous. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶55

7 . As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if

¶56

any, in this Writ Appea-l, sha1l stand closed.

¶57

To,

¶58

//TRUE COPY//

¶59

SD/- K. SAILESHI DEPUTREGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶60

1 . One CC to SRt B.MUKHERJEE IOPUCI

¶61

9n" 99 to SRt VEDULA SR|N|VAS A-&bcate [opUC] Two CCs to st Gp FoR AGRTCULTURE, iigh-b;; for the State of Telangana 4. Two CD Copies EDS G.IP

HIGH COURT

DATED:1711012022

JUDGMENT

t,.i. -14i
il g JII ?In
$

¶67

WA.No.739 of 2009

¶68

DISMISS!NG^I)F THE WRIT APPEAL AS INFRUCTI'OUS WITHOUT COSTS

¶69

@ l/
lv
al

The Government of India, rep. by its Secretary, v. M/s. Fertilizers and Pesticides Seeds Dealers Association

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Government of India, rep. by its Secretary, v. M/s. Fertilizers and Pesticides Seeds Dealers Association

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Proh. and Excise Superintendent-Cum-Functional Reg.,and 2 Vs Toddy Tappers Coop., Society, Niz., and Another

Chief Promoter/President, Tcs Group, Nizamabad Dist Vs President, Toddy Tappers Coop Society, Nizamabad and 3 Oth

Mrs. Gladys Reddy, Hyderabad. Vs the State of A.P. Hyderabad and 2 Others

Veeramma, Vs The A.P. Pollution Control Board

The A.P State Road Transport Corporation (Now Tsrtc) Vs G.S.Gangadhar

Naresh Shakula, Vs The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise