W.A.No.1850 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

RESERVED ON: 25.09.2023

DELIVERED ON: 19.10.2023

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

and

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI

W.A.No.1850 of 2019

and CMP.Nos.12510, 12512 and 12513 of 2019

The South Indian Sugar Mills

Association - Tamil Nadu,

Rep. by its Secretary, "Karumuthu Centre",

2nd Floor, 634, Anna Salai,

Chennai-600 035.

..

Appellant

Vs.

1.The Union of India,

Rep by the Secretary / Deputy Secretary to Government,

Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution,

Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi-110 114.

2.The Director of Sugar and

Cane Commissioner of Tamil Nadu,

690, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.

3.Tamil Nadu Karumbu Vivasayigal Sangam

(Regn. No.19/88), Rep by its Vice President,

Mr.D.Ravindran, S/o. P.Dharmalingam,

46-A, VOC Street, West Tambaram,

Chennai-600 045.

..

Respondents

1

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.1850 of 2019

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against

the Common Order dated 13.02.2019 in W.P.No.7872 of 2015.

For Appellant

: Mr.P.S.Raman, Senior Counsel

for Mr.Prahalad Bhat

For Respondents : Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan,

Additional Solicitor General

for Mr.J.Madanagopal Rao for R1

Mr.Haja Nazirudeen,

Additional Advocate General

assisted by

Mrs.R.L.Karthika,

Government Advocate for R2

Mr.S.Udayakumar for R3

JUDGMENT

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.

The writ petitioner is the appellant herein and aggrieved by the

dismissal of the writ petition holding that the omitted Clause 5A of the

Sugarcane Control Order, 1966 can be invoked against the members of

the Appellant Association, has filed the instant writ appeal.

2. Facts leading to the filing of the writ appeal, briefly narrated,

are as follows:

2

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.1850 of 2019

2.1. Sugarcane is declared as an essential commodity by the

Government of India under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 [in

short "EC Act"]. In exercise of powers conferred on it under Section 3 of

EC Act, the first respondent issued Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 in

connection with production, regulation and transportation of sugarcane.

The object of the Act and the Control Order issued thereunder is to

ensure that there is an adequate supply of sugarcane during every sugar

season for production of sugar, having regard to the demand for sugar for

domestic consumption.

2.2. The Scheme of the Order prior to the year 2009 was that the

Central Government determined a minimum price called the Statutory

Minimum Price (SMP) under Clause 3 of the Order. This price is fixed

based on detailed study and recommendations made by the Commission

for Agricultural Cost and Price (CACP) considering the relevant factors

mentioned in Clause 3. Clause 5-A price had to be calculated as per the

formula provided in the Second Schedule to the Order. The Schedule

provided for the determination of an 'L' Factor, which was usually

3

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.1850 of 2019

determined by the first respondent as soon as possible after the end of

sugar year (October to September), considering the cost schedule and

return recommended by the specified authority. The first respondent

lastly fixed 'L' factor for the year 2003-04 on 06.09.2005, but however

had not determined 'L' Factor for the sugar years 2004 to 2005 to

2008-2009.

2.3. According to the appellant, due to delay in declaring the

additional price under Clause-5A, the members of the petitioner /

appellant Association had on their own volition paid amounts in excess

of Statutory Minimum Price as advance towards Clause 5A price, as and

when the same gets determined to support the farmers in the growing of

sugarcane.

2.4. In the year 2009, by way of Sugarcane (Control) Amendment

Order, 2009, the Central Government substituted "Fair and Remunerative

Price" (FRP) in the place of Statutory Minimum Pr