1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.128 OF 2009 In PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.20 OF 2006 Ashok N. Kulkarni : Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra : Respondent And Daund Sugar Limited : Applicant/ Intervenor ... WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.130 OF 2009 In PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.20 OF 2006 Ashok N. Kulkarni : Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra : Respondent And M/s.Sitaram Maharaj Sakhar Karkhana Khardi Limited : Applicant/ Intervenor .... AND CIVIL APPLICTION NO.137 OF 2009 In PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.20 OF 2006 Ashok N. Kulkarni : Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra : Respondent And 2 Jijamata Sugar & Power Industries Ltd. : Applicant/ Intervenor .... Mr.N. Pradhan with Ms S.D. Khot for the applicants. Mr.R.D. Soni, amicus curiae. Mr.R.M.Kadam, Advocate General, with Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.G. Hariharan i/b. Pankaj K. for Union of India. Ms Manjula Bodhe i/b. Mr.Suresh Kumar for Provident Fund Office. .... CORAM : J.N.PATEL, ACTING C.J.& B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : JANUARY 21, 2010. P.C.: These Civil Applications have been filed by the applicants for intervention in the petition and also for a direction to the Commissioner for Sugar, Pune, to consider their applications for grant of permission for crushing of the sugarcane for the year 2009-10 and thereafter. 2. This Court vide order dated 12.7.2006 had directed the Commissioner for Sugar and the State Government not to issue any fresh permission for new sugar factories in the State of Maharashtra. The present Public Interest Litigation basically pertains to sugar factories in 3 the co-operative sector. The interim order stated above has been passed by this Court, taking into consideration that there is a serious imbalance between the permission for sugar factories and the availability of sugarcane. This Court has also observed that permissions have been granted on political rather than economic considerations. The applicants in the present applications have made a categorical statement that they would not seek any financial aid/grant or guarantee from the State Government. 3. In this view of the matter, we had directed the learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader to seek instructions from the State Government as to what is the policy of the State Government insofar as private sugar factories are concerned. In spite of grant of various adjournments, only a letter from by the Deputy Secretary to the Government addressed to the Asstt. Govt. Pleader is placed on record stating that at present, there is no Government policy to provide any regular financial assistance to private sugar factory. 4. This Court vide order dated 27.2.2008 in Civil Application No.81 of 2007 had directed the concerned authorities to consider the request of the applicant who is similarly situated like the applicants in the present Civil Applications. The said order has been followed subsequently by this Court. 4 5. We are, therefore, inclined to allow these Civil Applications. Accordingly, the applicants are permitted to be impleaded as party respondents in the PIL. The Commissioner for Sugar, Pune, is directed to grant permission to the applicants for crushing of the sugarcane for the year 2009-10 and thereafter. This shall be subject to the condition that the State Government shall not provide any financial assistance in the nature of grant/subsidy or guarantee for the establishments of the present applicants. We further clarify that the order dated 12.7.2006 would not come in the way of the State Government in considering similarly situated applicants for opening private sugar factories, provided that no financial assistance in the nature of grant/subsidy or guarantee is granted to the said applicants. Needless to state that the applications which are allowed and so also which would be considered by the State Government shall be subject to the final decision in the present petition. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE B. R. GAVAI, J.