skc 1 WP-4539-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4539 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1374 OF 2011 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1705 OF 2011 The Sahyadri Cooperative Credit Society Limited ..Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. S. S. Patwardhan for Petitioner and for Respondent No.1 in C.A. No. 1374 of 2011 and for Petitioner in C.A. No. 1705 of 2011. Mrs. M. P. Thakur - Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent nos. 1 to 4 in W.P. and in C.A. No. 1705 of 2011, and for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 in C.A. No. 1374 of 2011. Mr. Chetan G. Patil for Respondent No.5 in W.P. and C.A. No. 1705 of 2011 and for Respondent No. 6 in C.A. No. 1374 of 2011. Mr. J. Shekhar for Respondent No. 6 in W.P. and C.A. No. 1705 of 2011 and for Respondent No. 7 in C.A. No. 1374 of 2011. Mr. Amit Borkar for Intervenor in C.A. No. 1705 of 2011. Mr. Kiran S. Bapat i/b. Mr. Avinash Fatangare for Intervenor in C.A. No. 1374 of 2011. skc 2 WP-4539-11 CORAM : D. D. SINHA & A. R. JOSHI, JJ. 12 August 2011. P.C. : Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a multi state cooperative society registered under the provisions of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act. The respondent nos. 5 and 6 have applied for financial assistance to the petitioner. The petitioner has advanced the term loan of Rs.7 crores payable within a period of six months. Sugar stock of 35,000 quintals stored in godown no. 6 of the respondent nos. 5 and 6 was pledged and a document to that effect was executed between the parties dated 25th May 2011 which was also registered. 3. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent no.5 Karkhana failed to pay sugarcane dues of the sugarcane to the tune of Rs. 36,22,66,591/- and therefore the Commissioner of Sugarcane by exercising power under clause 3(8) of Sugarcane (Control) Order 1966 passed order dated 28th May 2011 and directed the Collector to take appropriate steps to recover the said amount by following procedure stipulated in the Land skc 3 WP-4539-11 Revenue Code from respondent nos. 5 and 6. 4. It is further contended that pursuant to the said order passed by the Commissioner of Sugarcane, the Tahsildar issued public notice dated 16th June 2011 for auction of the stock in question. It is submitted that the stock of sugar shown in column no. 6 of the public notice to be auctioned is the stock of sugar which was pledged with the petitioner, the petitioner therefore contended that the direction be given to the Tahsildar not to conduct auction of the sugar stock mentioned in column no. 6 of the auction notice amounting to 35,000 quintals of sugar. However, if the auction is permitted to be conducted as per the auction notice dated 16th June 2011 the consideration received by auctioning the stock of sugar amounting to 35,000 quintals be kept in a separate account and without the permission of this Court should not be permitted to be withdrawn. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Tahsildar conducted the auction of the stock of sugar and as per the directions of this court the consideration received so far as the stock of sugar which was pledged with the petitioner has been deposited in this Court amounting to Rs.27,94,27,910/-. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the decision of this Court dated 6th February 2008 rendered in writ petition no. 7936 of 2007 [Kolhapur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. The skc 4 WP-4539-11 State of Maharashtra & Ors.] as well as Order dated 31st January 2011 rendered in writ petition no. 4774 of 2010 and bunch of other petitions [Kolhapur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.], it is held that in view of the decision of the Apex Court in case of Central Bank of India vs. Siriguppa Sugars and Chemicals Limited [ (2007)8 SCC 353 ], principle which is governing the issue and is propounded by the Supreme Court there cannot be any doubt that the right of the appellant bank over the pawned sugar has precedence over the claims of the sugarcane growers and that of the workmen. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the above referred two decisions of this Court are based on the decision of the Apex Court and in view of the law declared, the petitioner has a priority over the claims of the sugarcane growers and that of the workmen and therefore appropriate directions in this regard be given. 6. We directed the learned Assistant Government Pleader to seek instructions from the Commissioner of Sugar as to why again and again the banks, the sugarcane growers and workmen are required to approach this Court for getting their dues when the law on the issue is already declared by this Court which is based on the decision of the Apex Court. The learned skc 5 WP-4539-11 Assistant Government Pleader on the basis of the instructions given by Mr. D. B. Gosavi, Director of Sugar, Pune, who is present in Court, has made a categorical statement that as per the order dated 28th May 2011 passed by the Commissioner of Sugar, the Collector is entrusted with this job of distribution of amount after the sale of the stock of sugar in question. It is submitted that the stock of sugar has already been auctioned and part of the amount pertaining to the stock of the sugar which was pledged has been deposited in this Court. However, it is further stated that the distribution of amount as per the hierarchy, keeping in view the law declared by the Apex Court and this Court shall be done by the Collector in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from today. 7. In the instant case, the order dated 28th May 2011 passed by the Commissioner of Sugar is neither impugned nor there is any challenge to the said order and therefore the question of adjudicating upon the same in the present writ petition does not arise. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be regarding distribution of amount received after sale of sugar is based on the law declared by this Court which is based on the decision of the Apex Court and therefore prayed that directions accordingly be given to the respondents. It is also not in dispute that the stock of sugar which was pledged to the petitioner and sold in auction, the consideration received is skc 6 WP-4539-11 deposited by the concerned respondent nos. 3 and 4 in this Court. The learned Assistant Government Pleader has made a statement that the Collector after taking into consideration the law declared by this Court in the above referred judgments, based on the decision of the Apex Court will consider the entitlement and priority while distributing the amount to the petitioner bank, sugarcane growers and workers accordingly within a period of four weeks from today. In view of these facts and circumstances, there is nothing further is required to be done in the present petition and the same is disposed of in view of the statement made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 8. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, civil applications do not survive and are disposed of accordingly. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (A. R. JOSHI, J.)