This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has

been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

“(i)

That, the impugned order Annexure P/1 be held

to be declared illegal and arbitrary and be

quashed and the system of procurement and

3

distribution as existing prior to the order be

allowed to continue.

(ii)

That, any other relief which this Hon'ble High

Court may deem fit including cost of the

petition.”

2.

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners

are the registered cooperative societies, which are functioning in the rural

area for the benefit of its members, who are mostly farmers and

agricultural dependent persons. The respondent no.1 in order to achieve

the object of cooperation movement has empowered the societies to

engage in the business of selling fertilizers in wholesale / retail for

industrial use by issuing Form “O” to the societies and the said Form “O”

were also issued to the petitioners societies. By the impugned order dated

30/6/2022 the respondent no.2 has stopped supply of fertilizers to the

petitioners societies. Although petitioners have approached the

respondent no.2, but no action has been taken and thus, this petition has

been filed on the ground that stoppage of supply of the fertilizers to the

cooperative societies amounts to discrimination. It is further submitted

that it is beyond understanding that how the situation of shortage of

fertilizers can be dealt with by stopping supply of fertilizers to the

cooperative societies ? On the contrary the respondents should have

increased the centers of distribution and should not have monopolized

the distribution of fertilizers through Pacs, Vipanan Societies and

Vipanan Sangh. It is further submitted that the impugned order is

unsustainable because of the fact that the basic purpose of the

Government behind passing the impugned order is to maintain the ratio

4

of 70 : 30 which is violative of Article 19 (1) (g) and 19 (1) (c) of the

Constitution of India. Stoppage of supply of fertilizers to the petitioners

societies has resulted in loss to the farmer members.

3.

During the course of arguments a specific question was put to the

counsel for the petitioners with regard to the reasons for issuance of the

impugned order dated 30/6/2022. It is mentioned in the impugned order

that because of lack of availability of racks and fertilizers, the supply of

fertilizers is getting affected. Lot of cooperative societies have been

issued Form “O”, which are distributing fertilizers, as as result, the pre-

decided ratio of 70 : 30, i.e. the Government and private sector, is getting

adversely affected and accordingly, it was directed that the fertilizers

shall be distributed through Pacs, Vipanan Societies and Vipanan Sangh

on cash basis and the fertilizers shall not be supplied to any other society

or institution. The counsel for the petitioners was specifically asked as to

whether the reasons of lack of availability of racks and fertilizers have

been challenged or not? It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners

that the reasons assigned in the impugned order dated 30/6/2022 are

correct and in this petition they have not challenged the same.

4.

Under these circumstances, where the petitioners have not

challenged the reasons for passing the impugned order, then the only

question which remains to be decided is “as to whether the restriction

imposed by the impugned order on supply of fertilizers to the cooperative

societies can be said to be reasonable restriction or not?”

5.

When the counsel for the petitioner was directed to argue on the

question “as to whether the fundamental right as enshrined under Article

19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India is absolute in nature or not and

5

whether the reasonable restrictions can be imposed in the light of Article

19 (6) of the Constitution of India or not”, then it is submitted by the

counsel for the petitioners that although he has not taken this stand

specifically i