Heard Mr.V.Dhanapalan for the petitioner in all these writ petitions, Mr.M.S.Palanisamy, Additional Government Pleader for respondents-1 & 3 to 5 in W.P.No.30052 of 2002, respondents-1, 3 & 4 in W.P.Nos.32378 and 32379 of 2002, respondents-1 and 3 to 7 in W.P.Nos.33048 and 34826 of 2002 and respondents-1, 3, 4, 6 and 7 in W.P.No.40339 of 2002 and Mr.S.Navaneethakrishnan for the Insurance Company, viz., 2nd respondent in each of these writ petitions.

2. The petitioner is the President of the Paddy Producers' Welfare Association at Thiruvarur District, and he has filed the above writ petitions on behalf of the members of the said Paddy Producers' Welfare Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Association"), claiming that the members of the Association are entitled for the benefits covered under the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme, formulated by the Central Government Agricultural Department, providing insurance coverage and financial support to the farmers in the event of any failure of notified crops due to natural calamities, pests and diseases, for issue of a writ of Mandamus to direct the General Insurance Corporation of India, Chennai, the implementing agency under the Scheme, to pay the insured amount to the members of the said Association, whose names are annexed to the representation of the fifth respondent-banks/cooperative societies in each of the writ petitions, based on the percentage of loss, calculated by the Inspecting Authority for the second harvest of paddy crop during the season 2001-2002, due to the flood in the respective areas in the said crop period.

3. The fact that the said scheme was formulated under the provisions of the Insurance Act, 1938, and that the members of the Association are covered under the insurance policy entered into with the second respondent-Corporation, which is the implementing agency through the respective banks/cooperative societies, who are arrayed as fifth respondent in each of the writ petitions, is not disputed.

4.1. Concedingly, the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme provides a procedure for approval and settlement of the claims under Clause 14 of the said scheme, which reads as follows:

" Procedure for approval & settlement of claims:

Once the Yleld Data is received from the State/UT Govt. as per the prescribed cut-off dates, claims will be worked out and settled by IA.

The claim cheques along with claim particulars will be released to the individual Nodal Banks. The Banks at the grassroot level, in turn, shall credit the accounts of the individual farmers and display the particulars of beneficiaries on their notice board.

In the context of localised phenomenon, viz., Hailstorm, landslide, cyclone and flood, the IA shall evolve a procedure to estimate such losses at individual farmer level in consultation with DAC/State/UT. Settlement of such claims will be on individual basis between IA and the insured. ”

4.2. The second respondent is declared as an implementing agency of the said scheme as per Clause 19 of the said scheme, which reads as follows:

" Implementing Agency (IA):

An exclusive Organisation would be set up in due course, for implementation of RKBY. Until such time as the new set up is created, the GIC of India will continue to function as the Implementing Agency. ”

4.3. Pursuant to the said scheme, operational modalities were prescribed, whereunder, a State-Level Coordination Committee on Crop Insurance to assess the shortfall in the yield, was formed, and Clause 7 of the Operational Modalities, provides the procedure for settlement of claims, which reads as follows:

“ Procedure of settlement of Claims: Once the yield data is received from the State Government as per the cut-off-dates decided, the claims will be worked out as per Declarations received from FIs for each notified area and approval is obtained. The Funds needed for payment of claims beyond the risk sharing limits of IA shall be provided by the Government to effect payment. The claim