9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 574X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and Cane Development of the State Government. Respondent No. 4 is the Cane Commissioner of the State and respondents Nos. 5 and 6 are the District Magistrate and the Tahsildar, Moradabad. 3. The petition originally filed, seeks a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent-Union of India, to modify its scheme of loan finance and to exclude the necessity of obtaining a guarantee from the State Government for the NPA units as according to the petitioner, it is superfluous. 4. The second prayer is to issue a writ of mandamus to the State Government to quash and set aside its order dated April 5, 2008, whereby the State Government has declined to give any guarantee to the petitioner for the sugar cane price that it has sought. 5. The third prayer to the petition is to seek a direction to the second respondent the State Government, to issue a guarantee in that behalf. 6. The petition is rather sketchily drafted, but as the facts have come on record from the subsequent pleadings, they can be stated shortly as follows : There is a dispute between the sugar manufacturing companies and the cane growers with respect to the price to be paid for the sugar cane for the years 2006-07 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on June 14, 2008, by the Cane Commissioner for recovery of an amount of about Rs. 15.68 crores and, therefore, by amendment, prayer clause (a) is added to quash and set aside this certificate. It has been submitted that the petitioner has made the payment for the, years 2006-07 (though there is a dispute about it) and for the years 2007-08 also, part of the amount has been paid, but part remains. 11. In the counter-affidavit filed on August 7, 2008, on behalf of the State Government by one Sanjay Gupta, District Cane Officer, affirmed on August 6, 2008, the recovery certificate has been defended. It has been pointed out in paragraph L that payment for sugar cane supply between March 1, 2008 to March 21, 2008, appears to have been made, but it is further stated that the payment has been made to give an impression to the farmers that the sugar cane price has been paid so as to get more supply of the sugar cane. 12. The petitioner has moved an interim application restraining the respondents from taking steps to recover cane dues for these two years. They are praying that no coercive measure be taken to recover this amount. 13. As far as the mandamus to the Union of India to modi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , is concerned, the State Government has relied upon article 293(1) and stated that it cannot give any guarantee from its consolidated fund for the NPA units. What the petitioner wants is the relaxation of the condition of the Central Government and a loan from the State Government to pay the difference between the SAP and SMP. These are policy matters and it is for the Central Government and the State Governments to decide and that apart, we have not been pointed out anything improper, irrational or unjustified or illegal in the policy or the stand that both the Governments have taken nor do we find any infirmity therein. These prayers, therefore, cannot be maintainable. 16. It was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the amount payable as of now is something over Rs. 10 crores and that the petitioner should be given time until the end of October, to clear off these arrears, it was submitted that the petitioner would create charge on the agricultural land of the director Shri Gaurav Dewan to protect the interest of the farmers. It was submitted that by the end of October, the new crushing season would have started and from the sale of the molasses and other by-products, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rted in [1993] 78 Comp. Cas. 803; [1993] 2 SCC 144. It was canvassed on behalf of the petitioner that those judgments were quite distinguishable on facts since in both matters, the amount sought to be claimed were prior amounts. It was submitted that section 22 of the 1985 Act should be confined to matters included in the pre-package state of affairs only. The apex court in the case of Deputy Commercial Tax Officer [1997] 89 Comp. Cas. 1 ; [1997] 10 SCC 649, in paragraph 14 held as under (page 11 of 89 Comp. Cas.) : "The situation which has arisen in this case seems to be rather exceptional. The issue that has arisen in this appeal did not arise for consideration in the two cases decided by this court in Gram Panchayat v. Shree Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. [1990] 2 SCC 440; [1991] 71 Comp. Cas. 169 and Maharashtra Tubes Ltd. v. State Industrial and Investment Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. [1993] 78 Comp. Cas. 803; [1993] 2 SCC 144. It does not appear from the above two decisions of this court nor from the decisions of the various High Courts brought to our notice, that in any one of them, the liability of the sick company dealt with therein itself arose, for the first time after the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 1 ; [1997] 10 SCC 649 and noted that it had categorically opined therein that there cannot be any impediment in the enforcement of the scheme. Section 22 provided for a safeguard against impediment that is likely to be caused in the implementation of the scheme. In the present case, Mr. Kesarwani appearing for the State pointed out from the order of the BIFR dated February 7, 2007, that when the operating agency was appointed, the BIFR had specifically laid down that the cut-off date of the scheme shall be taken as March 31, 2007. He, therefore, submitted that in any case, so far as the sugar cane purchased during 2007-08 is concerned, it would be outside the scheme to be framed by the BIFR. 22. In our view, the proposition laid down by the apex court in Jay Engineering's case [2006] 133 Comp. Cas. 670 ; [2006] 8 SCC 677, are laid down in the circumstances of that particular case. The rehabilitation scheme therein was sanctioned on April 8, 2003. The supply made by respondent No. 2 was a prior supply and was made a part of the scheme of rehabilitation. That being so, there could not be any order of execution for the same. In the instant case, the amounts claimed are essential f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 22 of the 1985 Act is available only for suits or proceedings of the like manner and not against a criminal prosecution. 25. Similar has been the view with respect to the wages of the workmen in a judgment rendered by a learned single judge of the Bombay High Court (Justice B. N. Srikrishna, as his Lordship then was in that court) that if the company was working during the pendency of the reference, the wages of the workmen could not be denied. That view has been taken by the learned single judge in B.P. Tawde v. Hes Ltd. [1995] Lab. IC 2200. 26. In Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. v. Church of South India Trust Association [1992] 75 Comp. Cas. 440 ; AIR 1992 SC 1439, the apex court took the view that section 22 did not bar eviction proceedings under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961. They were held not to be amounting to the kind of proceedings, which are covered under section 22. 27. In U.P. State Sugar Corporation v. Sumac International Ltd. [1997] 89 27 Comp. Cas. 179; AIR 1997 SC 1644, the question involved was with respect to invocation of unconditional bank guarantee. The court held that mere fact of the pendency of a reference against a party under the Sick Industrial Comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
