Back
ANITA SUMANTH
South Indian Sugar Mills Association, Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Agricultural Production Commissioner & Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture Department, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the First Respondent comprised in its G.O.Ms.No.252 Agricultural Department (K1) dated 24.12.2013 and the records of the Second Respondent comprised in its consequent letter in Rc.No.3774/Cane.1/2013 dated 8.1.2014 and quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and ultra vires the provisions of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966, in so far as the petitioner is concerned, and consequently forbear the First and Second Respondents from declaring any other price over and above the Fair and Remunerative Price fixed by the Third Respondent under Clause 3(1) of the Sugarcane Control Order, 1966 in respect of sugarcane purchased by the members of the petitioner for the sugar season 2013-14 and onwards.)
1. The State of Tamil Nadu houses a total of 43 sugar mills, of which two constitute public sector mills, 16 are Cooperative Sugar Mills and 25, private mills. The present Writ Petition is filed by the South Indian Sugar Mills Association in which,12 of the 16 private mills are members, represented by Mr.Satish
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State lacked the statutory basis to levy an Advisory Price over and above the minimum price fixed by the Central Act, and the enactment of....
The fixation of sugarcane prices must consider the current year's production costs and not rely on previous seasons' recoveries, ensuring proper stakeholder consultation.
The Central Government has the power to impose restrictions on the sugar industry under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the Sugar (Control) Order 2018, and such restrictions must be reasonabl....
The court ruled that executive instructions cannot override statutory rights and that monopolizing trade through G.O. No. 2976 was unlawful and unconstitutional.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
