ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI
Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi, J.
Vinuthnafertilizerss - Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 13169 of 2021
Decided On : 26-07-2021
FERTILIZER (CONTROL) ORDER, 1985 - INSECTICIDES ACT, 1968 - BIO-PRODUCTS - SALE AND DISTRIBUTION - INTERFERENCE BY AUTHORITIES - LEGALITY - GUIDELINES FOR INSPECTION AND ACTION - MODIFICATION BY DIVISION BENCH - SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS TO FERTILIZER ORDER INCLUDING BIOSTIMULANTS - EXTENSION OF TIME LIMITS - DIRECTIONS TO AUTHORITIES TO FOLLOW GUIDELINES AND PROVISIONS.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a manufacturer and distributor of bio-products, challenged the interference by respondents in the sale and distribution of their products, claiming that they do not fall under the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 or Insecticides Act, 1968. Earlier writ petitions were disposed of with directions for proper packing, marking, and information sharing, as well as guidelines for inspection and action by authorities.
Finding of the Court:
The court observed that the guidelines prescribed in the earlier order would remain in force until appropriate legislation is made. It noted the subsequent amendments to the Fertilizer Order including biostimulants and the extension of time limits for compliance. The court directed the authorities to follow the provisions and guidelines stipulated in the amended orders while dealing with the petitioner's products.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner's bio-products fall under the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 or Insecticides Act, 1968. 2. Legality of the interference by authorities in the sale and distribution of petitioner's products. 3. Applicability of guidelines prescribed in earlier writ petitions and subsequent amendments to the Fertilizer Order.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's bio-products do not fall under the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 or Insecticides Act, 1968, and therefore, the authorities cannot interfere with their sale and distribution. The court also held that the guidelines prescribed in the earlier writ petitions would remain in force until appropriate legislation is made. It noted the subsequent amendments to the Fertilizer Order including biostimulants and the extension of time limits for compliance. The court directed the authorities to follow the provisions and guidelines stipulated in the amended orders while dealing with the petitioner's products.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition and directed the authorities to follow the provisions and guidelines stipulated in the amended Fertilizer Order while dealing with the petitioner's products.
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in interfering with the production, sale and distribution of petitioner’s BioProducts, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The case of the petitioner firm is that it has engaged in manufacture, sale and distribution of Bio-Products such as; James bond, More 69, Vinzyme-L, Vinzyme-G, Khazana, Supreme, Warrior, Victor, Victore Plus, Vajhara, Vijaya-99, Jeel-9, Vibha, Vishist, Dandi, Fooster, Medal, Vijaya-999 and V. Prom 5, Vijaya CMS, Vejatha, CMS Grunavals, Vasudhaa, Dharani, Viraat CMS, Tejal, Bhairav, Dhaanya, Dharmavira, Dhaathri, Dhaarmik, Tejaswi, Sonakshi, Dhanishta, Daksh, Dhamman, Ekachakra, Ekaveera, Ekaveera plus, Garjan, Gandeer, Garuda, Jaagruth, Jaguar, Jamindar, Janzeer, Jeevan Mitra, Kanchan, Keerthi, Kingzymme (Liquit), Kingzymme (Granules), Mokshaa, Mothi, Pasidi-6, Terminator-11, Terminator Plus, Tejas, Tejaswi, Temper, Saviour, Tejasplus, Heera, Sona, Eesha, Bhamini, Mohini, Bhaadra, Bahula, Janani, Jago, Bhaagya, Gayathree, Jeett, Ekalavya, Tejas Grand, Avenger, VAM-Gold Viswajit, Tejas Plus Extra, Secure, Gardian, Garjan, Visthaar, Prudhavi; the said products are called as plant growth promoters and Bio Organic Fertilizers, as the said products are manufactured without usage of any toxic chemicals unlike the regular pesticides and insecticides; they are naturally derived and used as crop stimulants and growth promoters and hence the said products will not fall under the provisions of the Fertilizer (Control) Order 1985 or Insecticides Act, 1968; as the products of the petitioner do not fall under the ambit of either the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 or Insecticides Act, the same can be sold without there being any marketing permission under the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 and Insecticides Act; that in spite of the same, the respondents are obstructing the sale of the products; there is no prohibition on sticking on dealers who were granted a license under Section 13 of the Insecticides Act, 1968 read with Rule 10 of the Insecticides Rules, 1971 and the District Agricultural Officers of Kurnool, Guntur, Krishna, Chittoor, Anantapur, East Godavari, West Godavari and Kadapa are interfering and obstructing the business of the petitioner without assigning any reasons; the similarly situated firms filed W.P.No.25293 of 2014 and batch and after disposal of the said Writ Petition and batch on 10.07.2015, the matters were carried before the Division Bench by way of Writ Appeal Nos.1122 and 1136 of 2016 and the said order was confirmed with certain modifications; hence, the Writ Petition.
3. Writ Petition No.25293 of 2014 and batch were filed challenging the action of the respondents therein in interfering with the manufacture and sale of bio-products by issuing a memo dated 21.01.2006. The sum and substance of the said memo is that certain products are not covered under the Insecticides Act, 1968 and the stocking/exhibiting for sale from the licensed premises is not permitted. Writ Petition No.25293 of 2014 and batch were filed on the ground that when the activity is not covered by the provisions of the Act, the respondent authorities cannot interfere with the activities of the petitioners therein and the said Writ Petitions were disposed of with the following directions.
i) The petitioners shall not deal with bio-products without maintaining proper packing and marking of the product. The packing of bio-products shall contain the ingredients included in the product, analytical procedure and their percentage. This enables the authority to verify the contents of the product.
ii) The manufacturer of every bio-product should intimate the concerned Commissioner of Agriculture with regard to the manufacturing activity undertaken by it with name of the product, process and its content. The Commissioner of Agriculture need n
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.