1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7936 OF 2007 Kolhapur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.M.L.Patil for the petitioner Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. waives service for respondent nos.1 to 4 Mr.Vijay Patil for respondent nos.5 CORAM : J.N.PATEL CORAM : J.N.PATEL CORAM : J.N.PATEL & & & SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. DATED : 6TH FEBRUARY, 2008 DATED : 6TH FEBRUARY, 2008 DATED : 6TH FEBRUARY, 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission itself. The petitioner which is a Co-operative Bank is required to approach this court and invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction seeking to quash and set aside the order dated 23.6.07 issued by the Commissioner of Sugar, 2 Maharashtra State, Pune and that of the Tahsildar, Chandgad who issued a proclamation dated 6.7.07 and demand notice dated 9.7.07 and for ancillary reliefs that the Tahsildar for the purpose of recovery has no power and authority to seal the godown no.6 containing the stock of sugar in the premises of respondent no.5 which is pledged to the petitioner bank and is under their control. 3. The respondent Commissioner of Sugar issued an order dated 23.6.07 wherein he directed that sugar be attached and sold in order to pay the dues of sugar cane growers and that the first instalment of the sugar-cane producers in the year 2006-07 should be paid as per the statutory rate of sugar cane to the growers i.e. farmers for the crushing season 2006-07 which shall not be less than Rs.850 per mt with liberty to give to the sugar factories to pay more than the minimum bench mark fixed by the Commissioner and therefore, in exercise of his powers under Clause 3 (8) of the Sugar Control order, 1966 directed that the Daulat Shetkari Sahkari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Halkarni, Taluka Chandgad, Dist. Kolhapur is due for payment of 3 amount of Rs.2987.39 lakhs as per statutory minimum rate in the crushing season 2006-07 and another payment of amount of Rs. 379.48 lakhs for the year 2003-04 to the sugar-cane producers and directed to Collector of Kolhapur to recover the said the said total amount of 3367.87 lacs and interest thereon by appropriate rate as arrears of land revenue by sale of immovable and movable properties of the said Karkhana and further to be paid to sugar-cane suppliers by confirming the due amount of sugar-cane suppliers in the schedule annexed to the order that contained description of movable and immovable property. The stock of sugar held by respondent Karkhana was also specified. Accordingly on behalf of the Collector, Tahasildar of Chandgad Taluka issued a proclamation and a written notice of forfeiture which is subject matter of challenge. 4. The question which arises in this petition is as to who has precedence over the stock of sugar which is sought to be attached pursuant to the order passed by the respondent Commissioner of Sugar for making payment to sugar cane growers. 4 The issue stands covered by the recent decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Central Central Central Bank of India Vs. Siriguppa Sugars & Chemicals Bank of India Vs. Siriguppa Sugars & Chemicals Bank of India Vs. Siriguppa Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. & Ors. reported in 2007(6) ALL MR 431. Ltd. & Ors. reported in 2007(6) ALL MR 431. Ltd. & Ors. reported in 2007(6) ALL MR 431. In the said matter, the Supreme Court held that the principles which would govern the issue and as propounded by the Supreme Court there cannot be any doubt that the rights of the appellate bank over the pawned sugar has precedence over the claims of the Cane Commissioner and that of the workmen. 5. In the present case, it is not disputed that the sugar is pledged to the petitioner Co-operative bank as a collateral security against the loan advanced to the respondent sugar factory. In this view of the matter, we quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the Commissioner and the subsequent action taken by the Collector through the Tahsildar, Chandgad as a consequence of which the respondent would hand over possession of the godown holding stock of sugar which is pledged to the petitioner bank in the petition. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. 5 ( J.N. PATEL, J ) ( J.N. PATEL, J ) ( J.N. PATEL, J ) ( SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J ) ( SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J ) ( SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J )