Punjab-Haryana High Court
Akash Rice Mills & Others vs Union Of India & Others on 30 October, 2012
Author: G.S.Sandhawalia
Bench: Ajay Kumar Mittal, G.S.Sandhawalia
LPA No.357 of 2011 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
LPA No.357 of 2011
Date of decision:30.10.2012
Akash Rice Mills & others .....Appellants
Versus
Union of India & others .....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA
Present: Mr.D.D.Bansal, Advocate, for the appellants,
Mr.Gurmail Singh, Advocate, for respondents No.1 & 2,
Mr.Hari Pal Verma, Advocate, for respondent No.3,
Mr.Piyush Kant Jain, Addl.A.G., Punjab, for respondents
No.4 to 6.
*****
G.S.Sandhawalia J.
1. The present letters patent appeal has been filed against the order of the Learned Single Judge dated 10.08.2010, whereby civil writ petition No.14119 of 2010 filed by the appellants was dismissed.
2. The relief claimed by the appellants, who are rice millers, was that the circular dated 30.09.2009 (Annexure P-3), issued by the Food Corporation of India, whereby incentive bonus had been ordered to be paid only to the extent of 75% on the paddy milled by the appellants for supply of levy rice was against the spirit of the instructions dated 02.12.2008 (Annexure P-1), wherein the Central Government had declared the payment of incentive bonus to the farmers on the total paddy procured by the millers for milling. Further prayer is made for quashing the demands raised by respondent No.1 being against the instructions LPA No.357 of 2011 2 dated 02.12.2008.
3. The Learned Single Judge, vide the judgment impugned herein dated 10.08.2010, did not accept the plea of the petitioners that the incentive bonus was payable for the entire paddy purchased by the millers for levy rice and that circular dated 30.09.2009 restricts payment of incentive bonus on the proportionate levy rice milled and delivered by the rice millers resulting into 25% loss of incentive bonus. It has been held that the purpose for issuing circular dated 02.12.2008, is to award benefit of actual purchase made from farmers and to encourage the rice shellers to deliver the maximum rice out of the paddy purchased by them and this is also achieved by issuance of circular dated 30.09.2009. The relevant observations in paras 8 & 9 of the judgment of the Learned Single Judge reads thus:
"8. In my considered view, the purposive object behind the circular dated 02.12.2008 (Annexure P-1) is to release the 'incentive bonus' based upon the quantity of levy rice delivered by the millers out of the paddy purchased by them from the farmers. The impugned Circular dated 30.09.2009 explicitly regulates that very object for which it can neither be termed as in-consistent nor in conflict with the Government of India circular dated 2nd December, 2008.
9. The additional object behind regulating the payment of 'incentive bonus' as is sought to be achieved by the FCI through the impugned Circular is to encourage the rice shellers to deliver maximum rice out of the paddy purchased by them. It discourages hoarding and black marketing by the milled rice."
4. Counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that as per clauses 6, 7 & 8 of the circular dated 02.12.2008, issued by the Government of India, incentive bonus was to be paid against the paddy purchased by the millers for the crop for the year 2008-09 and the LPA No.357 of 2011 3 subsequent circular dated 30.09.2009, issued by respondent No.3, restricting the bonus to be given only to the extent of 75% of the paddy milled and not for the remaining quantity, was without jurisdiction. Accordingly, it was submitted that the recoveries were being wrongly effected by the State and the millers were being asked to deposit the amount.
5. Counsel for respondent No.3, on the other hand, defended the order of the Learned Single Judge and submitted that the instructions dated 30.09.2009 were valid and only clarifying the position in question.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any merit in the appeal. A perusal of the circular dated 02.12.2008, issued by respondent No.1 shows that the subject in question was procurement price of levy rice for the crop year 2008-09 which was fixed from 29.09.2008 to 20.10.2008. The said price was to be exclusive of all taxes, the incentive on the levy rice delivered by the millers was to be released by the FCI to the Government for passing to the farmers as mentioned in para Nos.5 to 8 of the said circular, which reads as under:
"5. The out turn ratio for raw rice and par boiled rice for KMS 2008-09 is 67% and 68% respectively.
6. The above price does not include incentive bonus. FCI shall make payment of bonus to the State Government or any agency nominated by them against the paddy purchased by the millers between 29.9.2008 during KMS 2008-09 when resultant rice is delivered as levy rice by millers. The State Government shall verify the stock of paddy by each rice mill and ascertain from the relevant records in order to make a payment of bonus the farmers who have sold paddy to the rice millers against which resultant rice is delivered to FCI.
7. It is also clarified that FCI will release incentive bonus to the State Government/agency authorized by them against the total paddy milled by the miller to deliver the levy rice. In other words, for instance at the out turn ration of 67% for raw rice, 1 LPA No.357 of 2011 4 quintal of paddy to the gives 67 kilogram of raw rice and millers deliver 75% of 67 Kg as levy rice i.e. 50.25 Kg of levy rice. Therefore, when miller delivers 50.25 Kg as levy rice, FCI would release incentive bonus of Rs.50/- per quintal of paddy to the State Government.
8. FCI HQ shall prescribe receipts, as deemed fit and proper, for such bonus released to the State Government for the farmer accounting purpose. State Governments shall fully satisfy that the procedure adopted by them will ensure that the incentive bonus reaches the concerned farmers duly and same is subject the audit of the State."
7. As per para No.5 of the above-mentioned circular, the out-turn ratio for raw rice and par-boiled rice for the said years was 67% and 68% respectively. Accordingly, as per Clause 7, the out-turn ratio for raw rice from 1 quintal of paddy was calculated and the miller was to deliver 75% out of the 67 Kg as levy rice. Thus, he was to deliver 50.25 Kg of levy rice. On the said delivery, respondent No.3 was to release incentive bonus of `50/- per quintal of paddy to the State Government. Similarly, as per Clause 2 in the annexures attached with the letter dated 02.12.2008, it was specified that the incentive bonus would be released against the total paddy milled by the miller to deliver the levy rice. This issue was only clarified by the subsequent circular dated 30.09.2009 which has been challenged. It has been specified thereunder that bonus could only be claimed towards 75% of the paddy. The remaining quantity would come under the free levy rice or paddy category, which could be sold in the open market.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant could not demonstrate that the action of the respondents in issuing circular dated 30.09.2009 was unjustified or it violated any of the vested legal rights of the petitioners. Accordingly, in view of the plain reading of the initial circular dated LPA No.357 of 2011 5 02.11.2008 and the subsequent clarification, no error could be shown in the judgment of the Learned Single Judge which may warrant interference in this appeal.
9. Finding no merit in the appeal, the same is, accordingly dismissed.
(G.S.Sandhawalia)
JUDGE
30.10.2012 (Ajay Kumar Mittal)
sailesh JUDGE