Delhi High Court - Orders
Mahyco Private Limited vs National Commission For Scheduled ... on 5 November, 2024
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~55
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 15417/2024
MAHYCO PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jayant Mehta, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Prashant Pakhiddey and Mr.
Manav Gill, Advocates.
versus
NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED TRIBES & ANR.
.....Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 05.11.2024 CM APPL. 64617/2024 (seeking exemption)
1. Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The Applicant shall file legible and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.
3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 15417/2024 & CM APPL. 64618/2024(seeking appropriate directions)
4. The Petitioner, Mahyco Private Ltd., is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, engaged in the business of production, processing and marketing of seeds and crops. They have filed the present petition, assailing notices dated 28th August, 2024 and 28th October, 2024 issued by Respondent No. 1/ National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, upon the W.P.(C) 15417/2024 Page 1 of 4 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/11/2024 at 21:46:13 complaint of Respondent No. 2.
5. The Petitioner and Respondent No. 2 had entered into an 'Agreement for Cotton Seed Production' on 23rd May, 2011, whereby Respondent No. 2 was required to organise production of cotton seeds with Variety Nos. 7816 and 7839. Along with the Agreement, Respondent No. 2 had also executed an indemnity bond as well as undertaking dated 23rd May, 2011, though which Respondent No. 2 had undertaken that in the event of non-supply of seeds or non-payment/ refund of the amounts advanced by Petitioner to Respondent No. 2, the Petitioner would be entitled to recover those amounts from the property of Respondent No. 2.
6. The Petitioner contends that Respondent No. 2 failed to supply cotton seeds as per the terms of the Agreement, resulting in financial loss to them. Accordingly, the Petitioner proceeded to enforce the terms and conditions of the Agreement relating to non-performance, and debited an amount of INR 18,29,100/- towards Respondent No. 2. The said amount comprised the advance payment of INR 16,87,500/- and cost of foundation seeds supplied to Respondent No. 2 amounting to INR 1,41,600/-.
7. In the above background, Respondent No. 2 approached the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana through Writ Petition bearing No. 46909/2016, seeking direction to the Government authorities to direct the Petitioner to compensate the farmers for alleged loss of crops. The Petitioner is contesting the said proceedings which is currently pending.
8. Respondent No. 2 has now made a representation dated 23rd August, 2024, before Respondent No. 1 to enquire into his complaint, which reads as follows:
W.P.(C) 15417/2024 Page 2 of 4This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/11/2024 at 21:46:13
9. In furtherance of the said complaint, Respondent No. 1 has issued notices dated 28th August, 2024 and 28th October, 2024, stating that they have decided to investigate/inquire into the matter in pursuance of their powers under Article 338A of the Constitution of India. Through the said notices, Respondent No. 1 has directed the Petitioner to file their reply, and also directed the Managing Director of the Petitioner Company to appear in person before Respondent No. 1.
10. Mr. Jayant Mehta, Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, states that Respondent No. 1 has no jurisdiction to entertain the aforesaid complaint as W.P.(C) 15417/2024 Page 3 of 4 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/11/2024 at 21:46:14 it does not reveal deprivation of any rights or safeguards available to Respondent No. 2 as a member of a Scheduled Tribe. It also does not disclose any action by the Petitioner Company that would lead to Respondent No. 2 being discriminated against or treated arbitrarily solely on account of his social status. Mr. Mehta also emphasizes that the dispute between the parties is purely commercial for which Respondent No. 2 has already filed a writ petition before the High Court of Telangana, and the same is currently pending consideration.
11. Having regard to the aforenoted facts and submissions advanced by Mr. Mehta, the Court finds that the Petitioner has made out a case for grant of interim orders. The Court is prima facie of the opinion that Respondent No. 1 is examining a dispute, for which it does not have jurisdiction under Clause 8 of Article 338A of the Constitution of India.
12. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, the proceedings initiated by Respondent No. 1 vide file no. NCST/DEV-3162/TS/1/2024-ESDW and the notices emanating therefrom, dated 28th August, 2024 and 28th October, 2024 shall remain stayed.
13. Issue notice to the Respondents, upon filing of process fee, by all permissible modes, returnable on the next date of hearing.
14. On service, such Respondents shall file counter affidavit within a period of four weeks from the date of service.
15. Re-notify on 14th January, 2025.
SANJEEV NARULA, J NOVEMBER 5, 2024 d.negi W.P.(C) 15417/2024 Page 4 of 4 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/11/2024 at 21:46:14