Bombay High Court
Madhav S/O Dhansingh Rathod And Others vs Union Of India, Through Secretary, ... on 4 September, 2018
Author: M. G. Giratkar
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari, M. G. Giratkar
Order 0409wp5513.16
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 5513/2016.
Madhav Dhansingh Rathod and others.
-VERSUS-
Union of India and others.
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI
& M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 04, 2018.
Heard Shri M.P. Karia, learned Counsel for petitioners, Ms. Chandurkar, learned Counsel for respondent no.1, Shri P.S. Tembhare, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 2 and 4 and Shri A.J. Pophaly, learned Counsel for respondent no.3.
2. 3 petitioners before this Court seek a direction to respondent nos. 2 to 4 to extend benefit of Crop Insurance to farmers in Arni Taluq, as per Government Resolution dated 02.03.2016.
3. This Court has issued notice in the matter on 22.09.2016. Respondent no.2 State has filed reply- ::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 06/09/2018 01:43:14 :::
Order 0409wp5513.16 2 affidavit on 06.03.2018. Reply is supported by affidavit of Taluq Agricultural Officer, Arni. Said affidavit discloses that as per procedure, 10 crop cutting experiments were conducted on random sampling method for estimating loss. The survey indicated loss only to the extent of 46% and as it was below 50%, cover of crop insurance is not available.
4. Respondent no.3 through its Regional Manager has also filed reply on same lines on 04.08.2018.
5. Learned counsel for petitioners after some arguments submits that it was incumbent for respondent no.2 to disclose the details of crop cutting experiments. According to him, some farmers have suffered more than 50% damages and in some cases it is 100%.
6. Respondents have rightly pointed out that affidavits filed long back are not countered and such assertions orally during arguments cannot be accepted.
7. In any case, we are satisfied that here some disputed questions of facts arise, which cannot be adjudicated by this Court. Hence, with liberty to petitioners to take such other steps as are open to ::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 06/09/2018 01:43:14 ::: Order 0409wp5513.16 3 them in law, and leaving all rival contentions open, we dispose of the present Writ Petition. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Rgd.
::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 06/09/2018 01:43:14 :::