THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 18291 of 2002 ORDER The petitioner herein is a Public Limited Company engaged in production and marketing of hybrid seeds. The Government of A.P with a view to protect the interests of the farmers introduced a mechanism of providing compensation whenever a farmer suffers because of sub-standard quality of seeds. Pursuant thereto, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated.20-04-2001 was entered into between the Government of A.P and the writ petitioner according to which the petitioner/seed producer has to certify that their own seed is conforming to the standards prescribed under various provisions of laws by mentioning the said standard on the tag/label of the pack-cover of the seed or container. The petitioner/seed producer has also agreed to take the responsibility and accountability on the quality of seed they produce and supply to the farmers and to pay compensation awarded by the District Level Committee constituted for the purpose. In order to fulfill the terms and conditions of the MOU, the petitioner/seed producer furnished security over the estimated turnover while entering into MOU. It is also relevant to note that the MOU contemplates a monitoring committee at District Level for assessing the loss sustained by the farmers due to poor germination or genetic impurity of the seeds. As per clause.3 (3) of the MOU, the District Level Committee after examining the complaint shall decide quantum of compensation to the affected farmers after ascertaining the facts and finding the reasons responsible for substandardness in the seed quality. Clause.3(4)(i) provides for quantum of compensation if it is a case of germination failure due to poor quality of seeds whereas Clause.3(4) (ii) provides for quantum of compensation if it is a case of genetic impurity. Clause.3(5) provides a remedy of appeal to the aggrieved seed producer to such of the authority nominated by the State Government within a period of thirty(30) days from the date of receipt of award of compensation by the District Level Committee. Clause.3(6) further made it clear that if any seed producer fails to comply with the award of the compensation given by the District Level Committee or the decision of the appellate authority the licensing authority after giving an opportunity of being heard shall suspend/cancel the licence granted for sale of seed to such seed producer. As noticed above, the writ petitioner entered into MOU with the State Government on 20-05-2001 and accordingly sold the cotton hybrid bio-seed 6567 and 6569 to different farmers. However, certain farmers in Warangal district who could not get proper crop made a complaint to the Agricultural Department and pursuant thereto, the District Level Committee visited the fields and by order dated.03-01- 2002 directed the petitioner that it should pay the compensation to the farmers @ Rs.6375/- per acre as the performance of bio-seed 6567 and 6569 cotton hybrid supplied by the petitioner over an area of 1685 acres and 1370 acres respectively was found to be poor. The 2nd respondent also directed payment of interest @ 24% p.a. in case compensation is not paid within 30 days. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 1st respondent-State Level Committee. The said appeal was heard along with similar other appeals and by order dated 2.5.2002 the District Level Committee was directed to make further investigation and submit a report on the aspects raised by the appellants. Accordingly a report was submitted by the 2nd respondent and thereafter, the appeal was heard by the 1st respondent-appellate authority on 18.5.2002 and the orders of the District Level Committee was confirmed. Aggrieved by the said orders of the respondents 1 and 2 under which the petitioner was made liable to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.27.06 lakhs, the present writ petition has been filed. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that as per the terms and conditions of MOU the petitioner is liable to pay the compensation to the farmers only where the crop loss is on account of germination failure due to poor quality of seeds and genetic impurity. It is contended that since the District Level Committee recorded a clear finding in the minutes of the meeting dated.03-01- 2002 that the cotton hybrid bio-seed supplied by the petitioner was found to be almost pure genetically and even the 1st respondent- appellate authority found that the crop loss cannot be attributed to genetic impurity of the seed supplied by the petitioner but it was due to non-adoptability of the cotton hybrid, the question of payment of compensation by the petitioner in terms of MOU does not arise. At the outset, it is to be noted that the agreement entered into between the parties under the MOU dated 20.04.2001 was not in exercise of any statutory power and the terms and conditions of MOU were not regulated by any Statute. The MOU is a voluntary act on the part of the parties and they are bound by the same. As could be seen from the recitals in MOU, all the rights and liabilities of the parties are regulated by the terms and conditions of the agreement itself. Hence even assuming that the impugned action is in breach of any one of the terms and conditions agreed upon, the remedy of the petitioner lies elsewhere and no relief can be granted by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed making it clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits and that the petitioner is at liberty to work out the appropriate remedy as available under law for redressal of its grievance. No costs. _______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 18.02.2009 *Tsnr