SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Cal) 648

High Court Of Calcutta
Bhaskar Bhattacharya And Rudrendra Nath Banerjee, JJ.
W.B.STATE CONSUMERs CO-OPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD - Appellant
Versus
W.B.DAIRY AND POULTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD - Respondent
MAT 849  Of  2007
Decided On : 08/24/2007

Advocates Appeared:
ANIKET MITRA, ARUNAVA SEN GUPTA, CHANDAN MOITRA, KALIMUDDIN MONDAL, P.K.DAS, PARTHA SARATHI SENGUPTA, Saktinath Mukherjee, TAPAN MUKHERJI

A valid acceptance of an offer for the purchase of damaged food grains from the FCI must be accompanied by the cost of 10% of the total amount offered by the FCI.

Headnote:

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE - DISPOSAL OF DAMAGED FOOD GRAINS - TERMS OF OFFER - VALID ACCEPTANCE - CONFEDERATION OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES - ACTUAL USER - CBI ENQUIRY - JUSTIFICATION: 1. A valid acceptance of an offer for the purchase of damaged food grains from the Food Corporation of India (FCI) must be accompanied by the cost of 10% of the total amount offered by the FCI. 2. A confederation of co-operative societies, which accepts an offer for the purchase of damaged food grains on behalf of one of its units, which intends to use the food grains, is considered an actual user. 3. A direction for an enquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into allegations of misuse of food grains is not justified when the purchaser is a confederation of co-operative societies, which has complied with all formalities and has no motive to sell the goods in the open market.

Fact of the Case:

The West Bengal Dairy and Poultry Development Corporation Ltd. (WBDPDCL) filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to compel the Food Corporation of India (FCI) to receive its bank draft for 10% of the total cost of damaged rice lying at the FCI depot in Siliguri and to allot the said rice to it. The WBDPDCL claimed that it was a user of damaged food grains and had entered into a rate-running contract with the FCI for the purchase of such grains. The FCI opposed the petition, stating that the WBDPDCL had not submitted a valid offer as it had offered to purchase only 2000 MT of the total 4454.8 MT of rice available and had not deposited the 10% cost of the total quantity offered. The West Bengal State Consumers' Co-operative Federation Ltd. (WBSFCCF), which had been allotted the entire quantity of rice by the FCI, also opposed the petition, contending that it was the actual user of the food grains and that the WBDPDCL was not entitled to any relief.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court found that the WBDPDCL had failed to prove that it had approached the FCI with the necessary application and the affidavits required to be accompanied by it. The Court also found that even if the WBDPDCL had submitted an offer for 2000 MT of rice, it was not a valid offer of acceptance as it did not comply with the terms of the offer. On the other hand, the Court found that the WBSFCCF had complied with all the formalities and was entitled to claim the rice as it had accepted the offer on behalf of one of its units, which intended to use the food grains.

Issues: 1. Whether the WBDPDCL had submitted a valid offer for the purchase of damaged rice from the FCI? 2. Whether the WBSFCCF was the actual user of the food grains? 3. Whether the direction for an enquiry by the CBI into allegations of misuse of food grains was justified?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. A valid acceptance of an offer for the purchase of damaged food grains from the FCI must be accompanied by the cost of 10% of the total amount offered by the FCI. 2. A confederation of co-operative societies, which accepts an offer for the purchase of damaged food grains on behalf of one of its units, which intends to use the food grains, is considered an actual user. 3. A direction for an enquiry by the CBI into allegations of misuse of food grains is not justified when the purchaser is a confederation of co-operative societies, which has complied with all formalities and has no motive to sell the goods in the open market.

Final Decision: The High Court set aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge and dismissed the writ petition filed by the WBDPDCL. The appeals filed by the FCI and the WBSFCCF were allowed.

BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, J.

( 1 ) THESE two mandamus appeals were heard together as these appeals are preferred against the self-same order dated 13th february, 2007 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court thereby allowing a writ application filed by the common respondent No. 1 herein, namely, the west Bengal Dairy and Poultry Development Corporation Ltd.

( 2 ) IN the writ application filed by the respondent No. 1 in these two appeals, it prayed for mandamus commanding the Food Corporation of India (in short "fci"), to receive the bank draft of Rs. 6,64,000/- bearing No. 612001 of Punjab national Bank, N. S. Road Branch dated 12th August, 2005 towards the earnest money being 10% of total costs of the quantity of the damaged rice sought to be purchased by it which were lying at the depot under FCI, Siliguri and to allot the said stocks of damaged rice in favour of the writ petitioner. In the said writ application, further prayer was made for commanding the FCI to recall the allotment order in favour of the West Bengal State Consumers' Co-operative federation Ltd. , who was the respondent No. 5 in the writ application. Other consequential interim prayers were also made.

( 3 ) THE grievance of the respondent No. 1 was inter alia as follows:

(a) The writ petitioner is a West Bengal State Government Undertaking under the Department of Animal Resources Development and the principal activity of the Corporation is the production and sale of animal-feed and running of several dairy firms, goat firms etc. According to the writ petitioner, it is a user of damaged food-grains, which are unfit for human consumption, and it has several manufacturing units of cattle-feed, poultry-feed and fish-feed in different districts in the State of West Bengal. (b) For manufacturing of poultry-feed, cattle-feed and fish-feed, the main raw materials are the damaged rice and wheat, which are not fit for human consumption and accordingly, the writ petitioner entered into rate-running contract with the FCI for purchase of such damaged food-grains from FCI. In pursuance of such rate-running contract, the writ petitioner usually purchased damaged rice and wheat direct from the FCI on formula-rate and the said food-grains are being used for manufacturing of cattle/poultry/ fish feed. (c) The Managing Director of the writ petitioner was served with a Memo dated 6th August, 2005 issued by the Senior Regional Manager, FCI for the disposal of the category of the damaged rice stocks lying at depot of the FCI, siliguri, whereby the writ petitioner was informed that a quantity of 4454. 8 mt of rice, unfit for human consumption, would be available under the disposal and accordingly, those were offered to the writ petitioner for sale on formula-rate basis. Accordingly, the writ petitioner was requested to communicate its willingness of purchasing the damaged food-grains along with 10% of the total costs of the offered quantity to the Senior Regional manager, FCI, West Bengal Region within 12th August, 2005. (d) Pursuant to such Memo dated 6th August, 2005, the writ petitioner was very much willing to purchase such damaged stock and accordingly, purchased a bank draft of Rs. 6,64,000/-on August 12, 2007 and on the self-same date, at about 2. 30 p. m. the Assistant Administrative Officer of the writ petitioner was present at the office of the FCI and wanted to deposit the said bank draft i. e. the 10% of the total costs of the quantity intended to purchase when the concerned officer asked the representative of the writ petitioner to wait for sometime. However, surprisingly enough, as per instruction of the authority, the concerned officer gave out that the time to deposit such bank draft was over and the draft would not be taken in any circumstances. (e) The refusal to receive the said bank draft was illegal, mala fide and without any valid reason and as there was no delay or laches on the part of w. B. State Consumer's Co-op. Federation vs. W. B. Dairy and Poultr






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top