(1) WP 6709.2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6709 OF 2008 Deelip Shridharrao Patil and ors. PETITIONERS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. N.P. Patil(Jamalpurkar), Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State. ..... CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 18TH JULY, 2011 ORAL ORDER: 1. The Writ Petition has been preferred against the respondents, contending that the statutory minimum price of ` 950/- per M.T. of sugar, which is the rate fixed by the Central Government, has not been paid to the petitioners for the crushing season 2007-2008. An affidavit has been filed by the State through the Regional Joint Director (Sugar) contending that the petitioners have been paid the statutory minimum price as declared by the Central Government under Clause 3(A) of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966. He has stated further that (2) WP 6709.2008 this includes the harvesting and transporting costs incurred by the sugar factory or the sugarcane grower. Considering these costs, the price has been paid to the petitioners after recovery of ` 252.17 per M.T. Accordingly, the petitioners have been paid @ ` 559.63 per M.T. for the aforesaid crushing season. 2. The learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners was unable to point out to us that the policy of the Central Government did not include the harvesting and transportation charges in the statutory minimum price payable to the sugarcane growers. In any event, since an affidavit has been filed indicating that the payment has been made, in case the petitioners find that the amount paid is less, it would be open for them to agitate their grievances before an appropriate forum. A Writ Petition is not the proper remedy. Petition rejected. Sd/- Sd/- [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] arp/