Telangana High Court
M/S Nanopil Crop Care And Another vs State Of Telangana And Another on 8 September, 2021
Author: P.Naveen Rao
Bench: P.Naveen Rao
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.21556 of 2021
Date:08.09.2021
Between:
M/s. NANOPIL CROP CARE, rep., by its
Proprietor Sri Bandi Konda Reddy,
Office at Plot No.69, H.No.10-2-114/1,
Ashwini Colony, Road No.2, West Maredpally,
Secunderabad and another .. Petitioners
And
State of Telangana, rep., by its
Principal Secretary, Department
Of Agriculture, Office at Secretariat
Buildings, Hyderabad and another .. Respondents
The Court made the following:
-2-
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.21556 of 2021
ORDER:
The prayer sought in the writ petition reads as under:
"... to issue an Order Direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in interfering with the business of sale and supply of the Bio-products namely RAFEL, GHATAK, FERRARO, GALAXY, NANO, ZYME, NANO FLOWER, TEJAS, LAIKA, DOKOOMO, MARCOOS, OMEGA, SELTOOS, KAROONA, TERRANO, DREAM9, MEEGILDOOT, SNIPPER, NANOOGROW, MICRA, FRIGATE, VIRANT, GARUDA, COMMANDO, SHADOW, NCC AIO (Nanopil all in one) EVOLDEN, AERONEX, SIGNOFLEX, NANOCAP, NANOMAX, OMEEX, EVOLDEN, REVIGRO, by issuing memo dated as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the provisions of law and consequently direct the Respondents authorities not to interfere with in any manner in the manufacturing and distribution of Bio products of the petitioner's firm RAFEL, GHATAK, FERRARO, GALAXY, NANO, ZYME, NANO FLOWER, TEJAS, LAIKA, DOKOOMO, MARCOOS, OMEGA, SELTOOS, KAROONA, TERRANO, DREAM9, MEEGHDOOT, SNIPPER, NANOOGROW, MICRA, FRIGATE, VIRANT, GARUDA, COMMANDO, SHADOW, NCC AIO (Nanopil all in one) EVOLDEN, AERONEX, SIGNOFLEX, NANOCAP, NANOMAX, OMEEX, EVOLDEN, REVIGRO, including the premises of their dealers/stockist under the Insecticides Act, 1968 and Fertilizers Control Order Act, 1985 and consequently set aside the same and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice."
2. Heard Sri E. Ramesh Chandra Goud, learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture and Cooperation.
3. Petitioner - company claims to be in the business of manufacturing bio-agro products in the name of NANOPIL CROP CARE by obtaining valid approvals from the respondents for manufacture, sale and distribution of several agro products mentioned in paragraph No.4 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. According to petitioners, bio-products manufactured and distributed by the petitioner - company is very much useful in -3- processing of agriculture and products manufactured by petitioner
- company are not having insecticides and are not pesticides.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner - company further submits that these bio-products are manufactured without using toxic chemicals; they enrich the soil; ensure protection of plants/crops from viral, bacterial, fungus and other infections, besides being useful for getting more produce of the crop. According to petitioner
- company, these products are not covered under the Insecticides Act, 1968 and the Fertilizers Control (Order) Act, 1985. Petitioner - company also furnished address of the unit in which manufacturing activity is taken up. According to petitioner - company, though they have complied with all the statutory requirements and the products are purely bio-products, without using pesticides, the respondent authorities are harassing and intimidating the employees and preventing them from manufacturing and marketing the products, causing lot of hardship and suffering to the petitioner - company.
5. By placing reliance on the decision of this Court in W.P.No.25293 of 2014 and batch, dated 10.07.2015, the decision of the Division Bench, in W.A.Nos.1122 and 1136 of 2016, dated 03.11.2016, and the directions issued by learned single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.9801 of 2020 and batch, on 05.08.2020, learned Counsel Sri E. Ramesh Chandra Goud would contend that the unnecessary interference and disturbance to the manufacturing and distribution activity of the petitioner - company is ex-facie illegal, amounts to arbitrary exercise of power and authority and discriminatory.
-4-
6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader sought to contend that petitioner - company is required to comply with Clauses 4 to 6 of the order dated 23.02.2021 of the Government of India, and only after a provisional Certificate of Registration is issued to them, they are entitled to carry on the manufacturing and distribution of bio-products. He further submits that Part-'C' of the said order prescribes procedure for drawal of samples of bio-stimulants and if appropriate application is made by specifying all the details as required by the order, the competent authority shall collect the samples, verify the nature of manufacturing activity and then only they will process the application for grant of provisional Certificate and the petitioner - company should cooperate with the competent authority in undertaking the exercise.
7. It is his further contention that in view of the order dated 23.02.2021 of the Government of India, there is compliance of the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court and petitioner - company is required to comply with the mandate of the order dated 23.02.2021 of the Government of India. Unless and until, petitioner - company complies with the requirements of the said order, they are not entitled to undertake manufacture and distribution of bio-products.
8. According to respondents, petitioner - firm was illegally manufacturing harmful products without giving intimation to the Commissioner and the Director of Agriculture. Until analysis of the product with respect to ingredients is disclosed, petitioner - company cannot claim that their products are without toxic chemicals. The bio-products stated to have been manufactured by -5- the petitioner - company are covered by the notification relating to bio-stimulants issued by the Government of India on 23.02.2021. Unless petitioner - company complies with the said order of the Government of India, they are not entitled to carry on manufacturing and distribution of the bio-products.
9. The statutory regime, as now in force, consequent to the order dated 23.02.2021 of Government of India, is not disputed. This regime is in the best interests of farmers and is in larger public interest. Therefore, its compliance is mandatory.
10. Since, admittedly, so far, application in compliance with Clauses 4 to 6 of the Government of India Order dated 23.02.2021 is not made and the issue is at the stage of consideration of application, if any, submitted, the Court is not expressing any opinion on respective submissions regarding the status of petitioner's products as being called as bio-products/bio-nutrients, to manufacture and distribute without any hindrance created by the respondent authorities.
11. Having realized that there is no valid compliance of the order dated 23.02.2021 of the Government of India, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave of the Court to make application in compliance of the requirements of the order of the Government of India.
12. In the case on hand, petitioner - company has not even submitted application as required by the notification issued by the Government of India. Unless an application is made in compliance with the requirements of Clause 5 of the Order, dated 23.02.2021, -6- it is not permissible for the manufacturer and distributor to undertake manufacturing and distribution of products.
13. In view thereof, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner - company to make application in compliance with the requirement of Clauses 4 and 5 of the notification issued by the Government of India bearing No.S.O.882 (E), dated 23.02.2021 within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If such application is made within the time stipulated above, the competent authority shall consider the same and take appropriate decision as warranted by law.
14. It is made clear that the competent authority is entitled to collect samples in compliance of Part-'C' of the order dated 23.02.2021 and test the compatibility of the products meeting the parameters to be marketed as bio-nutrients before granting the provisional Certificate of Registration. It is in the public interest to ensure that a product to be produced and marketed as a bio-nutrient with the object of helping the farmer to develop high cellulose and resistance power in the plants meets the parameters to qualify as a bio-nutrient. The petitioner - company shall cooperate in drawing the samples. Until the exercise, as directed above, is completed, subject of course to petitioner - company submitting application within the time stipulated above and in compliance of requirements of Clause 5 of the order dated 23.02.2021 of the Government of India, petitioner - company is entitled to manufacture and distribute the bio-products as contemplated by Clause 4 of the order dated 23.02.2021. However, it is always open to the competent authority to verify whether the -7- products manufactured and distributed by the petitioner - company are in compliance with the statutory requirements and take action as warranted by law. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date:08.09.2021 KH -8- THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.21556 of 2021 Date:08.09.2021 KH