IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 13982 of 2008 Between: Namala Ashok S/o. Late Yadagiri R/o. Chandanagar, Hyderabad, A.P. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Director of Sugars & Cane Commissioner Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, A.P. 2 M/s. Ganpathi Sugar Industries Ltd., Fasalwadi/Kulabgur, Sanga Reddy (Post) Medak District. (2nd Respondent is no standing hence Batta Paid) .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction or writ more appropriately a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents in not responding to the damages caused to the Petitioner as illegal and violative of the provisions of the A.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply & Purchase) Act 1961 & A.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply & Purchase) Rules, 1961 and declare that the Respondents herein are jointly and saeverely liable to pay the damages of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs) apart from paying the cost of the Sugarcane of 18 M. Tones which was taken delivery of the Same at Rs. 38,000/- (Rupees Thirty eight thousand) to the petitioner forthwith with interest at 24% per annum from the date of due till the date of realization and also direct the 1st Respondent to take appropriate penal action against the 2nd Respondent under Sections 23 & 24 of the A.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply & Purchase) Act 1961. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RAJANNA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR AGRICULTURE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 13982 of 2008 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not responding to the damages caused to the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal and violative of provisions of the A.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply & Purchase) Act, 1961 and the Rules made thereunder and to declare that the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay damages of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) apart from paying costs of sugarcane of 18 MT, of which delivery was taken at Rs.38,000/-, along with interest thereon till the date of realization. It appears, the petitioner is an agriculturist and a sugarcane grower. The 2nd respondent is a private sugar factory, registered under the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner, as a sugarcane grower, was attached to 2nd respondent. Therefore, an agreement was entered into by the petitioner with the 2nd respondent for supply of sugarcane. Though he was ready to supply sugarcane, the 2nd respondent received only 18 MT and, thereafter, the remaining sugarcane could not be delivered, as permits were not issued by the 2nd respondent. As such, it had gone waste and ultimately it was burnt out. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation before the 1st respondent asking to adjudicate the dispute between him and the 2nd respondent for payment of compensation for damages of the crop etc., but no action was taken. Hence, this writ petition. There is no necessity of going into all the details. Admittedly, 1st respondent is the authority to adjudicate the dispute arising between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent under Rule 21 of the A.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Rules, 1961. Therefore, the 1st respondent is directed to take up the issue and decide the matter on its own merits, as per law, after putting the petitioner as well as the 2nd respondent on notice, hearing them and taking evidence, if any, necessary – both oral and documentary – and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. C.V. RAMULU, J. Date: 2-12-2008. MVB.