IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 10701 of 2009 Between: 1 Mallisetty Rama Devi, W/o. Mallisetty Rambabu, R/o. Koyyalagudem (Post and Mandal) West Godavari District. 2 K.Rama Rao, S/o. Kristnamurthy, R/o. Koyyalagudem (Post and Mandal), West Godavari District. 3 K.Basavaiah, S/o. Kristnamurthy, R/o. Koyyalagudem (Post and Mandal), West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Auction Superintendent, Tobacco Board at Koyyalagudem, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT 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 Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent herein in not purchasing 30 quintals of Tobacco from the 1st petitioner and not purchasing 15 quintals of Tobacco from 2nd and 3rd petitioners each as illegal and contrary to the permit granted for the year 2008-09 and consequently petitioner and 15 Qts., from 2nd and 3rd petitioners herein. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.CHANDRA SHEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.SRINIVASA REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 10701 of 2009 O R D E R : The petitioners herein claim to be the small farmers, who are growing Tobacco in their lands. It is further claimed that they are holding Tobacco growers pass books and the Tobacco grown by them is being purchased by the Tobacco Board at Koyyalagudem. It is also claimed that they are possessing barns required for curing the raw Tobacco and the licences granted to the said barns are being renewed every year. It is further stated that the Tobacco Board used to deduct 1% as service charges from the amount payable to the authorized Tobacco growers including the petitioners herein. However, a notice dated 30-04-2009 was issued alleging that the petitioners had undertaken Tobacco curing in unauthorized barns and therefore, it was decided to deduct 5% from the auction proceeds. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners herein filed W.P.No.9972 of 2009 and this Court, by order dated 20-05-2009, directed the respondents to deduct only 1% from the purchase amount payable to the petitioners. While the things stood thus, the Tobacco Board having started auction of sale of the Tobacco from 27-02-2009, purchased only a small portion of the Tobacco grown and cured by the petitioners. It is contended that the respondent-Board is bound to purchase from the first petitioner 43 quintals of cured Tobacco and similarly from the petitioners 2 and 3 the Board is bound to purchase 21.50 quintals of Tobacco each. However, the Tobacco Board purchased from the first petitioner only 4.14 quintals and 2.50 quintals each from petitioners 2 and 3. Contending that the action of the Tobacco Board in not purchasing the entire quantity of Tobacco cured from the barns of the petitioners is arbitrary and illegal, the present writ petition is filed. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Tobacco Board, it is stated that during the crop season 2008-2009, the Board has taken a policy decision not to renew registration of the registered growers who or whose family members have constructed barns unauthorizedly in violation of the provisions of the Tobacco Board Act, 1975 and the Rules made thereunder, during the previous crop years and are operating the same resulting in unauthorized and excess Tobacco production. In terms of the said policy, when the Board refused to grant renewal of registration to the petitioners and several other growers similarly situated, they made representations and having considered the same, the Board took a decision to renew the registration on the undertaking being given by the growers that either they or their family members will not operate or cure Tobacco in the barns constructed by them unauthorizedly. The petitioners herein also submitted such undertakings on 22-10-2008 and basing on the same, the petitioners were granted renewal of registration. However, it was found that the petitioners operated unauthorized barns in utter disregard to the undertakings given by them. In the circumstances, show cause notices dated 11-04-2009 were issued calling upon the petitioners to explain as to why their registration should not be cancelled. Pending final decision in the matter, the Board permitted sale of Tobacco on payment of penalty of Re.1/- per kg and 5 % on the value of the Tobacco. Challenging the said action, the petitioners filed W.P.No.9972 of 2009. In compliance with the interim orders in the said writ petition, the petitioners were permitted to sell their Tobacco at auction platform on 26-05-2009 which is the date on which the Tobacco grown in the area in question was permitted to be sold. On the said date, the first petitioner was permitted to sell 4 bales and petitioners 2 and 3 were permitted to sell 2 bales each in accordance with the procedure being followed by the Board. On the next date of auction the Tobacco grown by the petitioners would be allowed to be sold as per the quota fixed for the date and the authorized Tobacco grown by the petitioners would be permitted to be sold by the time the auction platforms are closed in the season. It is further explained that as per the procedure followed by the Board, after the auction platforms are opened in the season, depending upon the area where the Tobacco is grown, specific dates are allotted and the growers who grow Tobacco in a specific area will be allowed to sell the Tobacco at the auction platform. The said procedure is being followed by the Board to ensure that all the growers get uniform returns and each grower will be allowed to sell a certain quantity of Tobacco per barn. It is further stated that the demand for Tobacco is quite good for this crop season and the auctions are likely to continue till the first week of July, 2009 and the petitioners will be permitted to sell their authorized Tobacco on the dates specified and that they will be allowed to sell the bales as fixed by the auction Superintendent. I have heard the learned counsel for the both the parties. As could be seen from the statement of objects and reasons of the Tobacco Board Act, 1975 (for short ‘the Act’) and the provisions contained thereunder, the Tobacco Board has been constituted in the interest of the growers and to ensure registered growers to get proper price for the Tobacco. It is also clear that as per the demand in both the Domestic and International Markets, the registration committee of the Tobacco Board would fix the crop size and grant registrations/renewal of registrations to the growers. The Tobacco Board also provides the infrastructure for the registered growers to sell the Tobacco on the auction platforms managed by it. As per Section 13 of the Act, no registered grower or curer shall sell or cause to be sold Verginia Tobacco elsewhere than on an auction platform registered with the Board/established by the Board. The Tobacco grown by the registered growers would be purchased by the registered dealers or exporters at the auction platforms and the Board charges fee for the services rendered. It is also clear from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Board that to ensure that all the growers get uniform returns, each grower will be allowed to sell certain quantity of Tobacco per barn. Hence, the entire Tobacco grown by the petitioners cannot be permitted to be sold at one time as sought by the petitioners. It is also clear from the counter affidavit that the auctions are likely to continue till the first week of July 2009 and it was ensured by the Board that the petitioners would be permitted to sell their authorized Tobacco on the dates specified. The allegation of the petitioners that the auction of the respondent-Board is discriminatory is without any basis and absolutely no case is made out to show that the other registered growers were allowed to sell the entire Tobacco grown by them at one time. It is true that in the notices dated 30-04-2009 it was alleged that the petitioners had cured the Tobacco grown by them in unauthorized barns. However, the petitioners have already submitted their explanations and the further enquiry is still pending. Moreover, the liability of the petitioners to pay 5 % of the sale proceeds as decided by the Board in their proceedings dated 16-04-2009 is the subject matter of W.P.No.9972 of 2009 in which a counter affidavit is yet to be filed on behalf of the respondent. Hence, it is not necessary for this Court to express any opinion as to the correctness of the allegation made by the Tobacco Board in the notices dated 30-04-2009 and the validity or otherwise of the Tobacco Board’s decisions dated 16-04-2009. So far as this writ petition is concerned, the only issue involved is whether the petitioners are legally entitled to sell the entire quantity of the Tobacco grown by them at one time. As already expressed above, the petitioners could not make out a case to establish any such legal right and therefore no mandamus can be issued compelling the respondent-Board to permit the petitioners to sell entire Tobacco grown by them at the auction platform at one time. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Dated: 08-06-2009 KLP