WP/34480/2011 of M/s.Sanjeevani Bio Remedies, rep.by its Proprietor Vs The Commissioner AND Director of Agriculture on 29 December 2011

Order:

The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the action ofthe Commissioner and Director of Agriculture, A.P., Hyderabad, ininterfering with its business of manufacturing and sale of bio-products by issuing Memo No.PP.II(1)2085/2005, dated 21-01-2006 and Letter No.PP.II(1)2085/2005, dated 21-01-2006, asillegal.

2. The petitioner is manufacturer/marketer of bio-products withvarious brand names. It claims that the said bio-products aremanufactured without using any toxic chemicals and are useful to enrichthe soil and ensure protection of land/crops from viral, bacterial, fungusand other infections, resulting in more production. According to thepetitioner, the products manufactured by it are not covered either underthe Insecticides Act, 1968 or Fertilizer Control (Order) Act, 1985.

Therefore, there is no obligation on it to obtain licence under the saidActs for manufacturing/marketing the bio-products. Hence, it is the case of the petitioner that the respondenthas no jurisdiction to interfere with its business activities in dealing withthe bio-products.

3. Ms. B.V.Aparna Lakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioner andthe learned Government Pleader for Agriculture appearing for therespondent submit that the relief sought for in this writ petition is squarelycovered by the orders of this Court in W.P.No.17337 of 2010 and batch,dated 01-11-2011.

4. In view of the said submission, this writ petition is disposed ofwith the following comprehensive directions, at the stage of admission.

(a) The petitioner shall submit a sample of 5 kgs., of eachproduct dealt with by it together with the correspondingliterature throwing light upon the manufacturing process aswell as the contents thereof together with thecomposition/components of the products to the respondentherein. The respondent shall not refuse to receive thesamples whenever submitted by the petitioner.product dealt with by it together with the correspondingliterature throwing light upon the manufacturing process aswell as the contents thereof together with thecomposition/components of the products to the respondentherein. The respondent shall not refuse to receive thesamples whenever submitted by the petitioner.

(b) The petitioner shall also permit the officers authorized by therespondent to collect samples from the manufacturingunits/sale points. The petitioner shall furnish details of its salepoints to the respondent for drawal of samples.respondent to collect samples from the manufacturingunits/sale points. The petitioner shall furnish details of its salepoints to the respondent for drawal of samples.

(c) The petitioner shall remit a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees fivethousand only) in respect of each sample along with thesamples to the respondent to meet the expenses of analysis.thousand only) in respect of each sample along with thesamples to the respondent to meet the expenses of analysis.

(d) Within 8 (eight) weeks from the date of compliance ofconditions as indicated in Clauses (a), (b) and (c), therespondent shall get the same analyzed in a suitablelaboratory and intimate the result of the analysis to thepetitioner.conditions as indicated in Clauses (a), (b) and (c), therespondent shall get the same analyzed in a suitablelaboratory and intimate the result of the analysis to thepetitioner.

(e) In case, the analysis reveals that the products dealt with bythe petitioner answer the description of the productsmentioned in Schedule-III to the Control Order and theInsecticides Act, it shall be entitled to deal with the productsonly after obtaining Registration/licence under the ControlOrders. On the other hand, if the result is found otherwise, thepetitioner shall not be subjected to the regime under theControl Orders; andthe petitioner answer the description of the productsmentioned in Schedule-III to the Control Order and theInsecticides Act, it shall be entitled to deal with the productsonly after obtaining Registration/licence under the ControlOrders. On the other hand, if the result is found otherwise, thepetitioner shall not be subjected to the regime under theControl Orders; and (f) If the respondent fails to intimate the result of the analysiswithin 8 (eight) weeks from the date of submission of thesamples as indicated above, it shall be open to the petitionerto deal with the products, notwithstanding the impugned letterand the memo, as long as the products are not insecticides orchemicals.within 8 (eight) weeks from the date of submission of thesamples as indicated above, it shall be open to the petitionerto deal with the products, notwithstanding the impugned letterand the memo, as long as the products are not insecticides orchemicals.

It is also made clear that in the event the respondent receives anycomplaints from the ryots with regard to the quality of the bio-products supplied by the petitioner, it shall be open to the respondentto take necessary action in accordance with law.

5. In view of disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.42914 2011is dismissed as unnecessary. No costs.

___________________NOUSHAD ALI, J.

29[th] December, 2011.Ak

29[th] December, 2011.(Ak)