M/s. Vivin Agri Biomax v. The State of Telangana and Another

Court: High Court for State of Telangana

Bench: A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

Judgment date: 2020-12-07

Case summary

High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2020-12-07. M/s. Vivin Agri Biomax v. The State of Telangana and Another. Read the judgment and case...

Judgment text

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF DECEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 21977 OF 2020 Between: lr//s. Vivin Agri Biomax, Rep. by its Managing Partner Koduri Prabhasa Sri Krran, S/o, Srr Rama tr/urthy, aged 47 years, Occ. Business, R/o Flat No. 40i, Panduranga Arcade, Bandari Layout, Nizarnpet Village, Bachupalli tr,,4andal, I\,4edchal - Malkajgiri District - 500072 lndustry address Sy. No. 450, Srivenkteswara Colony, Sulthanpur, Amenpur [,4andal, Sanga Reddy, R. R. District. ... PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Telangana, Rep. its Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. Commissioner and Director of Agriculture, Telangana, Gun Foundry, Hyderabad. ...

RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 o'f lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of l\,4andamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering With the manufacturing, l\rlarketing, Distribution, Sale and Supply of the Petitioners Bio products of VIROQR, VIRANIL, VIRAGO, VIREX, VIRASTOP, BIOREPEL, RATGO, BORESTOP, BIOSHOCK, BIOSTOP. PIGSTOP, BIOFENCE, BIRD X, BIRDGO, BIRDAWAY, BIOPHOS, BIO P, ORGANOPLUS, NUTRA PLUS, CALIVAX -G, RIO POTASH, BIO K, BIO[/IN.

POTr\/AX, PESTIL, PESTNO, PESTROREP, PESTOHALT, PESTOSTOP, SUKIL, SUKEX, SUCKHALT SUCKNO, SUCK X, IVITEX, IVITEHALT, IVITNO, IVITEX, IUIGHTY, FUNGEX, FUNGINILL, FUNGINO, FUNGIHALT, FUNGIFIGHT, ZYI\,'I IX, SUPERZYIVE, AM INOZYIVE, NATUREZYIVE, ZY[/EIVAX, ZYIVERICH, ZYIMEMIN, FORTIK, C-ZYIVE-1, SEAIVAX, SEAZYME, SEAPOWER, ROOTEX, SEAIVIN, SEABOOST, BIOBOOST, BIOVIN, BIOVIIN, TURIVOIVAX, BIOBLEND, BIORICH, JEEVAN, JEEVAN PLUS, FLOWER RAJA, FLOWER BOOST, FLOWER TOP, FLOWER IVAX, BUD IVAX, POUSHAK, POUSHAK PLUS, POUSHAK PLUS, HUMAIVAX, HUMI GROW, HUMOMIN, NITRO HUMATE, NITRO POTASSIUN/ HUMATE, FLYER, HOPPER STOP, FLYERTOP, CONTROL, BIOFLY, ROOTEX, ROOT X, ROOT GROW, ROOT MAGIC, ROOT SHOOT, YIELD BOOST, YIELD TOP, YIELD MAX, YIELD MAGIC, NUTRI SHOT, N MAX, K MAX, NUTRI IMAX, BIO MAX, DRIP MAX, ORGANO IVAX, DRIPBOOST, IVIINIVAX, READY MAX, MAGIC N/AX, BIO GROW.

BIOMIRACLE, FANTASTIC, DOUBLE SOIL EXTRA SOIL, SOIL BOOST, SOIL IVAGIC, SALTNIL, OXYRICH, OXYSOIL, SOILDOST, IVITTI MAGIC, SUPER ROOT, SUPER GROW, SUPER NEEN4, SUPER ROSE, SUPER SHOT, SUPER VEG, SUPER FRUIT, SPOT NIL, SUPER PROTECT, KITCHEN GROW, POTIVIX, GROW IVAX, PLANT SHAIVPOO, BIO SHAIVPOO, VEG SHAIVPOO, ORGANIC BLAST, ORGO PROTECT, PLANT UIVBRELLA, .

1, DIVINE TULASI, TULASI IVAX, SUPER SHOT, BIO SHOT, N MAX N I\4AX PLUS, NUTRI[/IN, SUPER SEA, SUPER TASKER, SUPER FLOWER, SUPER TULASI, NEEM PLUS, NEEM STAR, NEE[/ GOLD, AZA NEE[/, BIO NEEI\i, NEEIV X, NEEI\,I IVIORE, KARA PLUS, K ZEN, KARA IVAX, KARA STOP, FISH IVAX, FISH GOLD, FISH SHAKTHI, IVEENA THAILA, I\4EENA ZYME, TURMO GOLD, TURIVAX, TURMO NIL, TURMEX, GROWMAXX, CROP PLUS, RAFTAR, REGAL, BIO AWAY, BIO FENCE, BIO CLEAR, BIO SAFE, N I\,4AX I PLUS, MEENA KA TAIL, FISHIVAX, FISH N/AGIC, BIO SAFE, WET N/AGIC, WET PLUS, NUTRISHOT, EVOLVE, SILICON WET, NEW IVAX, N/AGIC PLUS, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and further direct the respondents not to intedere with in any manner in the manufacture , l\rlarketing, Sale, Supply and distribution of the petitioners above Bio-products.

lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to allow the petitioner to manufacture, Marketing, Sale, Supply and distribute the Bio-products are VIROQR, VIRANIL, VIRAGO, VIREX, VIRASTOP, BIOREPEL, RATGO, BORESTOP, BIOSHOCK, BIOSTOP, PIGSTOP, BIOFENCE, BIRD X, BIRDGO, BlRDAWAY, BIOPHOS, BIO P, ORGANOPLUS, NUTRA PLUS, CALMAX -G, BIO POTASH, BIO K, BIOMIN, POTIMAX, PESTIL, PESTNO, PESTROREP, PESTOHALT, PESTOSTOP, SUKIL, SUKEX, SUCKHALT, SUCKNO, SUCK X, IVITEX. IVITEHALT, IVITNO, MITEX, MIGHTY, FUNGEX, FUNGINILL, FUNGINO, FUNGIHALT, FUNGIFIGHT, ZYMIX, SUPERZYTME, AIVINOZYIVE, NATUREZYTVE, ZYIVEIVAX, ZYMERICH, ZYMEMIN, FORTIK, C. ZYME-I, SEAIVAX, SEAZYME, SEAPOWER, ROOTEX, SEAIVIN, SEABOOST, BIOBOOST, BIOVIN, BIOVIIN, TURTVOIVAX, BIOBLEND, BIORICH, JEEVAN, JEEVAN PLUS, FLOWER RAJA, FLOWER BOOST, FLOWER TOP, FLOWER IVAX.

BUD IVAX, POUSHAK, POUSHAK PLUS, POUSHAK PLUS, HUIVAIVAX, HUMI GROW, HU[/ON/IN, NITRO HUMATE, NITRO POTASSIUIU HUMATE, FLYER, HOPPER STOP, FLYERTOP, CONTROL, BIOFLY, ROOTEX, ROOT X, ROOT GROW, ROOT IVAGIC, ROOT SHOOT, YIELD BOOST, YIELD TOP, YIELD IVAX, YIELD [/AGIC, NUTRI SHOT, N IVAX, K [VAX, NUTRI MAX, BIO [VAX, DRIP IVAX, ORGANO IVAX, DRIPBOOST, IVINMAX, READY MAX, IVAGIC IVAX, BIO GROW, BIOIVIRACLE, FANTASTIC, DOUBLE SOIL EXTRA SOIL, SOIL BOOST, SOIL MAGIC, SALTNIL, OXYRICH, OXYSOIL, SOILDOST, IVITTI IVAGIC, SUPER ROOT, SUPER GROW, SUPER NEEM, SUPER ROSE, SUPER SHOT, SUPER VEG, SUPER FRUIT, SPOT NIL, SUPER PROTECT, KITCHEN GROW, POTIUIX, GROW MAX, PLANT SHAIVPOO, BIO SHAN/POO, VEG SHAI\/POO, ORGANIC BLAST, ORGO PROTECT, PLANT UIVBRELLA, DIVINE TULASI, .

1, TULASI IVAX, SUPER SHOT, BIO SHOT, N IVAX N IVAX PLUS, NUTRIIVIN, SUPER SEA, SUPER TASKER, SUPER FLOWER, SUPER TULASI, NEEM PLUS, NEEM STAR, NEEN/ GOLD, AZA NEEIV, BIO NEEM, NEEM X, NEEM MORE, KARA PLUS, K ZEN, KARA MAX, KARA STOP, FISH IVAX, FISH GOLD, FISH SHAKTHI, I\,IEENA THAILA, IVEENA ZYME, TURI/O GOLD, TURMAX, TURMO NIL, TURNIEX, GROWIVAXX, CROP PLUS, RAFTAR, REGAL, 81O AWAY, BIO FENCE, BIO CLEAR, BIO SAFE, N IVAX PLUS, MEENA KA TAIL, FISHMAX, FISH IVAGIC, BIO SAFE, WET MAGIC, WET PLUS, NUTRISHOT, EVOLVE, SILICON WET, NEW IVAX, MAGIC PLUS, including from the licensed premises of the dealers/Stockiest under the lnsecticides Act, 1968 and the Fertilizers Control (Order) Act 19 Pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. NAGA PRAVEEN VANKAYALAPATI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR AGRICULTURE The Courl made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.

21977 of 2O2O ORDER FIeard learned connsel Ibr thc petitioner ancl learned Government Pleader for Agriculture appearing for tl-re rcspondents It is surbmitted b1' learned cournsel lor the petitioner that the subject matter of this u'rit petition rs squarell' covered b1' the common order passed b1'this Court in W. P. No. 25293 of 2014 and batch, dated 10. 07. 2015 as modified by the Division Bench in W. A. Nos. 1. l22 and 1136 of 2016, dated 03. 11. 2016. Following the above orders, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the said orders. There sha1l be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this r. r'rit petition, shall stand closed. SD/- K. AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGIST ,TRUE COPY' SECTION OFFICER To, 1'ThePrincipalsecretarytoGovernment,AgricultureDepartment,Stateof Hyderabad Telanoana. Secretariat Buildings, 2 c;;;;;;;iino oir". tot of igricllture' Telangana' Gun Foundry' Hyderabad. g Advo,cate IOPUC] Oire-CC io Sri.

Naga Praveen Vankayalapati, High Court for the State of Telangana ;. i;; ccslo cp foiAgriculture, tourl 5. Two CD Copies. (AlongWithacopyoforderdateddatedo3tl1t2o16inWA. No. 1122and1136of2016. ) PIV \ s: HIGH COURT DATED:0711212020 1 HE 14 ORDER ( o WP. No. 21977 of 2020 ,4 DEC2U0 2 * * ! l ,,i Disposing of the WP Without costs. )! \& HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA Writ Anoeal Nos,1 1 22 and Ll36 of 2016 COMMON JUDGMENT: (per Honble the Acting Chief Juslice Ramesh Ranganathan) While elaborate submissions are made both by the Learned Ciovcrnment Pleader lor Agriculture appearing on behalf of the appellants and Sri S.

Niranjan Reddy, Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behall of the respon d en t-rvrit petitioners, both of thcm would agrce that the qucstions which necessitate examination are (r) rvhethcr, bl'u'a),of the proceedings impugned in the Writ Petition, tl-re appellants can prohibit sale of bio-products in shops licensed to stock and sell insecticides; (ii) r,l,hether the authorities are empowered to classify all bio-products as insecticides; and (iii) whether the guidelines, stipulated in the order under appeal, would preclude the authorities from exercising their powers under the Insecticides Act, 1968 ("the Act" for short) and the Rules made thereunder. As has been rightll, held by the Learned Single Judge, the fundamental right to carry on business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitr-rtion of India can or-rlv be restricted in accot'clance r. t'ith Articlc 19(6) thcrcol.

Wl-rilc the Act rcquircs a licencc to bc obtained lor storing and selling insecticides, no provision, either in the Act or the Rules made thereunder, has been brought to our notrce u'hich prohibit a liccnsee lrom selling other products, in addition to insecticides, in the ve. v- same premises. The impugned memo, r. r,hereby dealers rvere prohibited from stocking, exhibiting and selling bio-products not covered under the Act, from the premises for which a license has been granted under the Act and l the Rules, is not authorised either by any of the provisions of the Act or the Rules made thereunder. The fact, however, remains that though the guidelines, in the order under appeal, have been stipulated in the larger public interest of protecting farmers, some of the conditions prescribed therein appear to run contrary to the provisions of the Act.

As the Learned Government Pleader for Agriculture has rightly pointed out Clause 6 of the guidelincs, which requires a report from thc concerned laboratory to be obtair-red not later than a n,eek from the dzrte of collection of thc sample, docs appear to fall foul of the time limit of one month specified in Section 2 1(1)(d) of the Act. Likcrvisc Clausc 7, ri. hich requires crcdiblc inform:rtion to form the basrs o1' collcction of . r sample, may u,cll bc construed ars restricting tl're povr. er, conlerred under Section 2 1 ( 1 )(d) of the Act, on thc Insecticide Inspector to withhold stocks if he has reason to believe that insecticides are being distributed, sold or used in contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. While we are in complete agreement with the submission of Sri S.

Niranjan Reddy, Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-writ petitioner, that thcre cannot be an omnibus categorisation, of all bio-products as insecticides, lbr the purpose of taking action under the Act, the grounds on lr,hich the lnsecticide Inspector has reasor] to believe, that insecticides are being sold in contravention of the provisions of tl-re Act and the Rules, il'ould depend upon the facts of each case, and cannot be circumscribed by i. r,ay of guidelines issued b1' this Court. The guidelines prescribed, in the order under appeal, can only supplement and not supp. ian t the larv. and \r. ou. ld remain in lorcc onl,v till approprrate legislation - either plenary or suborclinate _ is made rn this regard.

Suffice it, while making it clear that there cannot be an omnibus categorisation of all bio_products as insecticides for taking action against the dealers of those goods, to also make it clear that the guidelines, prescribed in the order under appeal, sharl be in acrdition to, and not in derogation of, the po\\,crs conferred. n the concerned authorities under the Act ancl thc Rulcs. We mil, not be ur. rclerstoocl to I'ravc exprcssecl iln1, opinion on u hctherr or not an1. ' of these bio-products arc rnsccticidcs, as thesc are mauers rvhich thc authorities conccrned are rcquired to exarnine in accordance ri'ith the provisions o[ the Act, thc Rr-r1es made thereunder, and thc guidelincs stipulated in the order under appeal. The order under appeal is modlfied to the extent indicated hereinabove, and the Writ Appeals are disposed of accordingly. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand disposed of. No costs. RAMESH RANGANATHAN, ACJ A. SHANKAR NARAYANA, J Dertc:03. 11.

2016 cs

Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.