Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Raghavendra Rice Working Company vs The Union Of India, on 28 July, 2022
Author: R Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
par necee net ete fe So 1 " IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANONBA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) _ THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY VO THOUSAND AND TWENTY Two SPRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAQ- Sshveen: 1) Raghavendra Rice Working Company, Rep. Managing Partner Katragadda Pamidath, 5/o Ramakrishna Raa, Aged about 75 years, ec: Business, R/o.D.No. 7/85, Bethapudi, Repalle Mancal, Guntur UNstrict. ¥ 2) Parvathi Parameswara Rice Mil, Rep. Managing Partner N Basi, o/o Nagendra, Aged about 68 years, BR/o.D.no.4-20, Cherukupalli, Guntur DNstrict. 3) Sri Lakshmi Murali Mohana Rice & Flour Mil. Rep. Managing Partner G. Venkata Subbarao, 2/o Nagendra, Aged about 55 years, R/oD.no.1-138, Cherukupalll, Guntur District. 4) Sri Rama Krishna Rice Mil Rep, Managing Partner K Sampath Babu, 5/o Rama Brishna, Aged about 72 years, Réo.Dano 90/1, Cherukupalli, Guntur (istrict. 3} Sri Lakshinl Rice MU (Contractors), Sai Venkateswara Rice MIN, Rep. Managing Partner \. Venkateswaran, S/o Anjaiah, Aged about 55 years, WRIT PETITION NOQc 22821 OF 30 22 Rfo.D.no.2-170, Porupalll, Cherukupalll, Guntur District. 5) Sri Venkatasware Rice MIL. Rep. Managing Partner Ch.Sitaramanjaneyagupta, S/o Subba Raa, Aged about 68 years, R/o.Dno.8/3, Crerukupalli, Guntur District. Ty Sri Venkateswara Mill, Rep. Managing Partner M. Srinivasa Kao, 2/0 Janardhana Rac, Aged about 30 years, Rfo Dno 4-157, Pucigaddauaripalem, Cheriulupalll, Gurtur District. 8) Venkateswara Traders, Rep. Managing Partner. Tanmnana Venkete Subba Rao, S/o Naga Bushan Rao Ras, Aged about 6F years, Oce: Business, R/o DNo. 2 = Bhattiproh ' Bhattiprolu Mandal, Guitar TMs trict 9) Sri Padmalaya Rice Mull, Rep, Managing Partner. Vermuri Rama Mohnama Rao, S/o Radhakrishna Murhty. aged about 606 yeras, Circe: Business, ROD Nox 48-99, Seghavataram Vari Street, Ring road center, Repalle, Guntur District. 10) Sri Msha Lakshow Rice Working Company, Rep, Managing Farmer, Ver kata Hanuman whe Rao, S/a Anjaney wiu, aged about 55 years, Occ: Business, Rio. D.ne.5-29-11/ 12, Kepalis, Guntur District LD) Sci Reviruira Rice Working company, Rep Managing Partner,. Seemalcarthi V y Veerananeyal, afo¥ enkata Subba Rao, Aged about 62 years, Occ: Business, R/o.Duno. 15-26-66, Jaur ayal ala Vari Street, Old Town , Repalle, Guntur District. 12) Vilava Dugra Rice Mu, Rep. Managing Partner, Konern Venkta Naga Sambasiva Rao, S/O. Subha Rao. Aged about 71 ye Oce: Business, K/ OD No 15-266 Repalis, Guntur Distric 2S, 5/4, Old Town, 13) Sri Rajeswari Rice Workng € SOL IPaAny, Mop T Chaitanyakumar S/o pitchaiah, = Agesfify R/o Morlavari Palem R Road, Kepalle, Guntur District, 14) Sei Raghaveridra Rice Industries ae. Managing Partner, K Koganti Rr Prabhakara Raa, R/o - Dr No: 4) 25.199, wyyayuy : Kepalle Man dal, Cantar District. LS) Sri Vasavi Rice Working Com pany. ay Rep. Managing Partner Tulluri ri barmiasekhar Raa, S/o Purnachancdra Rao, Agecs5,Cice: Business, K/a, Dr Noro-35-74(1), Repalie, Guntur UNetrict. 16) Ori Nagaswara Rice Mit, Rep. Managing Partner. Kasani Srinivasa Rao, S/o Anjaiah, Aged about 47 years. Occ: Business, Ryfo.Dune. 2-1, Pudivada Nagaram Manual, Counthar Uiistrict, *} Sudha Rice Mull, ep. fanaging Parmer G. Prasad, 3/0 Satyana rayana, Aged about 6 years, Rio Rea 3-180, Ammutt nahar, Gurbur Dishes. 18) Lakshmi Annapurna Traders, Rep. Managing Partner TV.S.P Prasad, S/o Noteswarara, Aged about G2 VRAYS, Ryo.0hne, 3-199. Kollure I Road, Vernuru, Gurter Districg. i9) Sri Sai Balaji Rice Traders, Rep. Managing Partner C. satish Babu, S/o Rama Rao, A 'sec about 48 years, Rio Dino 4-123 /1, Kolhor Road, Yemurn, Guntur District 20) Sr Lakshmi Ganapathi Rice Mu, Rep. Managing Partner 8. Venkat subbaiah, S/o Krishna Murthy, Aged about 61 years, Ry/o.D.no.2/ 151, Vemurg, Guntur Dietrics, wey 2i} Bharathi Dewl Rice Ma) Sep. Managing Partner B. Bharathi devi, W/o Prabhakara Raa, Aged about 6 SG Years, K/a.Dino 5-93, Vemuru, Guntur District, ¥ 22) Sai Baba Rice Traders, Rep. Managing Partner M, Harish Chandra Babu, 5/0 Sai Babu, Aged about 45 years, R/foDne2-38-11/1GL, Srinivasam, ae Bloor, Gandhi Nagar Tenali, Guntur [Nstrict. 23) Sri Gajanana Rice Industries, Rep. Managing Partner KV. Ramarac, S/o ¥ enkateswarar o, Aged about 55 years, R/o.D.no.3-105, Varahapuram Road, Vermura, Guntur Districh 24) Surya Traders, Rep. by its Proraitors, Lakshimikantamma, R/o D. No. 3-163, Main Road, Near Railway Station Gate, Vemnurn, Guntur District, 25} Sri Radha Sw amy Puce MOU, Rep. Managing Parmer A.Venkateswarha, S/ Oo Kataiah, Aged about F4 years, | Rya.Dno.10- 55/7 ?, Inbaru post, Amarthhu, Guntur District 26) Raghavendra Rice & Dall MUL Rep. Man naging Pariner <P . Verikata Rambabu, S/o P. Venkata Subba RAo Gary Aged about 85 years, Ryo. DJNo.10/ TL Rachid, Arnarthalury, Cruntur UNsbrict. a7} Sai Grujana Traders, Rep. Managing Partner TiChandra Monk, S/o Ankulatha. Aged about | 58 years, oe Ryo. DINoL/ 275, Gollapalli, Cherukupalli, Cruntur District, 28} Sri Sita Ramanjaneya Rice MIL Rep. Managing Partner K. Srinivasa Keddy, S/o Rami Reddy, Aged about 53 years, R/o.D.no.11-165/4, Munnagivari palam, Chunduru, Guntur District 29} Sri Srinivasa Rice Mil. Rep. Managimg Partner A.Kot Reddy, 3/08 Veera Reddy, Aged about 70 years R/a. Dune. 1-20, Thite empudi, Cumhar District, Petitioners ANB 1) The Union of India, Rep. by Secretan Mibustry of Consumer Affairs, Foorl and Pubic Distributl for, Krashi Bhavan, New Delhi 2} The Food Corporation of India, Rep. by iis Chairman ssid Managing Director, Head Office, 16-20, Barakhamba Lane, New-Delhi-l] COOL, 3) The Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India, Kajanarendra Building, D.No.e-14-2A4, Krishna Nagar, - Patamata, Yenamalakucura Road, Vijayawada-S20007 4) 'The Divisional Manager, Hood Corporation of Indias, Divisional Office, Guntur, Guntie Uéstrict. oResporid ents Retdion under Aricde 238 of the Conatiiution of india praying thet in the arcumelances stated in the affidavit Hed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particular ny are in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, calling for records pertaining fo orders in Fle No. Proneedi ings SQAVP No PaS4 of 2022- MLC, dated 12/08/2023, 18/08/2022 and Tea oo respect vely and Quash the same after declaring the same, ag Hi legal, arlirary, violation of Princinies of Natural dusti IOS, vidiation of Articles 14, 19¢1\a) and 21 of the Constitution of india a, and onsequently rect the Ressondents nef to claim any refund of amounts under the ishour charges borne by the Pafitioners in Tespent of suoply of ring to the Respondents from the neriod 2008-8010 fo BOVS-2044, - IANO: TOF 20g2 Petition under Section 184 CPG praying that in the ciroumetances stated in the aldiavil filed In support of the petition, the righ & aut may be oieeseci to direct the Nespondenis not fo renover the Mandi | r Charges from the Pefifioners by Suspending the operation of impugned order rs Fis No. Proceedings JOAVP No. 7854 of aGc2-MLC dafed 12/6082, 18/o Gi2022 ¢ and Ta/oQ/2022, Pending dispasal of WP 22827 of 2022, an the file of the High C out. The petition caming an for hearing, "upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereat and upon hearing the argumants of Sri P S P SURESH KUMAR | Advouate for the Petitioners anc Si No Harinath Assistant Solletter General of India for Ressondent Nod and Sri Syamsunder,: SC For the Respondent Nos.2 fo 4, the Court made ihe inllawing, _ ORDER:
"Natice before admission, 2, Bri Shyam Sunder Nae, learned volinsel takes notice for respondenty 2 to 4 and aceks firme io fils cmanter. :
3. The peifiioners ars rice nit rss: who have been supplying rice to the 2° respondent, The issue before this Court arase on account of the supplies made hy the petitioners between the years 2009-19 to 2013-14. The petitioners had collected Mandi iahour charges from the 2° * respondent: towards payment of the labour expenses incurred by the petitioners fer loading and anioad! ing wee bags during the course of supply of rice te the 2° respondent, The petitinners hadurecs sived payments far the supplies sleag with Mandi ighour charges. hs 4, Subsequently, the Conaptralier and Auditer General is said in have commented on the payment af these Mandi labour charges and had opined that the said charges could not have been paid te the petitioners as these charges are payable anly in these States where the Mandi system is prevalent and such payments could nef have been done te millers in Andhra Pradesh where the mand{ aystem docs mat exist.
S. On the basis ef this report, the Let respondent is said to have directed the 2ad respondent threugh a meme bearing NeF No ASQ y2GIS-FC Aves, dated SLUT2018 to recover Mandi labour charges paid to: VRNIORS ree mulls in the Stete of Andhra Pradesh including the petitioners herein, = :
& On the basis of this direction, the respondents 2 te 4 have new issued arders ta the petitioners fo repay the Mandi Inbour charges awhich had earlier been paid tp them during the period mentioned above, Aggrieved hy the asid direction, the petitioners have approached this Court by way af the pres sent w vit petition.
7. Sei PS. Suresh Raner, learned ¢ coansel for the petithiners assails the impugned order on various grounds. ke &. For the purpess of this order, ats Coart j is conshiering fva grounds. Firstly, the power and authority of the 2" » respondent t to recover such amounts and secondly, on the 9, On the first ground, the contention ef the potitiencrs is thet the 2° respondent does not have any authority fo recover monies and any such alcampt to recover the monay from the petitioners should be through a preemlure known te law. This would mean, institution of suils ar preceedings befere the appropriate Couris ar Trihwnels, and the ad same cannot be deve unilaterally by the 2°" reapondent or Ns affielals.
10. The seennd ground raised by ihe petitioners bb, the question of limitation.
appears that the 2°" respondent bas taken the view that Article 112 af Schedule te the Limiiation Act permits sneh reeavery for a periad of 30 years. However, this stand may set stand te clese scrutiny as the said Ar dele applics to the Central Government or the State Government end the 2 respondent, which is a Public Sector Corporation incorporated as an Independent entity, cannet oihtain the benefit of Articie 112.
ii, Prima facie, this Court fnils considers abie mori in both theese cenfentions.
ik. Agcerdingly, there shall be an jnterion direction as pr ayed for, frre peric tad of aly weeks. "
Sdi- MLRAMESH BABU " ve Post on 1S.O8202%. DEPU TY REGISTRAR FTRUE COPY H x To us wAA \ section OFFICER The Secretary, Union of india, | F Gonsumer é ANairs, Food and Public : Gist fOURO Mt, rush Bhavan, Nev
2. The Ghainnan and Managing 2 36-20, Ssrakhamba Lans, New-t be
3. Fhe Regional Manager, Food Cerne india, Ralanerendra Building, D.No?4-14-2A, Krishna Nagar, Petar arnata, enamalakuduru Road, Vieyawada- Songs , ; oe a. ie Divisional Manager, Food d Garpe oration of india, Divisional Offlee, Guntur, Guntur Distrin'. (1 to 4 by RPA XD) wae os -- 7 & One CC to SRE NHARINATH, 1 ASSISTANT SOLICTTOR GENERAL OF INDIA Advocate fOPUC) One OC to SRIP SP SURESH & CUMAR Advocate [OPUC) One CC to SRI SAYAMSUNDER, SC, Advocate [OPUC] One apars copy Sep PRE Ss od Corporation of India, Head Office, Ay 4, oN HIGH COURT RRRJ DATED. 2aOF 2022 BOSTON 16.08.2002 ORDER WP.No 22821 af 2022 INTERIM DIRECTION