IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 6246 of 2009 Between: Polavarapu Suresh S/o.Veeraiah R/o.Chellavarigudem Jangareddigudem Mandal West Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Tobbaco Board, rep.by its Secretary,Guntur Guntur District 2 The Auction Superintendent, Tobbaco Platform No.2 Jangareddigudem, Jangareddigudem Mandal West Godavari District .....RESPONDENTS 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 order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not considering the application filed by the petitioner dated 10.3.2009 for register and selling the Virginia Tobacco of the petitioner through the 2nd respondent platform as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the provisions of Tobbaco Act and consequentially direct the respondents to register his name as a Tobbaco grower and permit the petitioner to sell the Virgina Tobacco through the 2nd respondent platform. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.R.K.AMERANDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.SRINIVAS REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 6246 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to sell his Virginia Tobacco through second respondent platform, as arbitrary and illegal. It is not in dispute that the writ petitioner is the unregistered grower. However, it is pleaded by the petitioner that the respondents ought to have considered his request for selling his tobacco on levying penalty as per the circulars issued by the Government of India from time to time. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri S.Srinivas Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the Central Government has been imposing penalties on the unauthorized growers with a view to curtail growing of tobacco unauthorisedly. It is further stated that by Notification No.S.O.1596 (E), dated 01.07.2008, issued by the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department of Commerce, Government of India, New Delhi, the Tobacco Board was authorized by the Central Government to permit the sale of Tobacco grown by the unregistered growers by collecting the penalty of Rs.1/- per Kg and an extra fee of 5% of the proceeds of the sale as service charges. It is also stated that the tobacco grown by the unregistered growers would be allowed to be sold after the sale of tobacco grown by the registered growers is completed. Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and having regard to the specific stand taken by the respondents in their counter affidavit that the tobacco unauthorisedly grown by the petitioner would be allowed to be sold by collecting the penalty and service charges, as directed by the Central Government, after the sale of tobacco grown by the registered owners is completed, no further adjudication is necessary in this writ petition. Accordingly, recording the statement of the respondents in their counter affidavit, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for sale of his tobacco in terms of the Notification of the Central Government, dated 01.07.2008 after the tobacco grown by the registered growers is sold. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI, J Date:07-07-2009 KLP