MARUTHI KHANDASARI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the petitioners in these petitions are all industries manufacturing khandasari sugar located at bidar district, Karnataka state. It is the case of the petitioners that their industrial units were established several years back and the licence for manufacture of khandasari sugar or rab for conversion into khandasari sugar were issued to them by the state government in exercise of the delegated power as provided under the Provisions of Karnataka khandasari sugar manufacturers licensing Order, 1980. The licences issued to the petitioners for the period commencing from 17-12-1990 to 16-3-1991 have been produced as annexures-1 to 9.

(2.) in these petitions, the petitioners have prayed for: (1) "quashing condition No. 14" provided in licences annexures-1 to 9 issued to them; (2) direction to respondents 1 to 6 not to impose any condition in the licences for manufacture of khandasari regarding each petitioner without following the procedure prescribed; and (3) and also for a further direction to the respondents 1 to 6 not to insist on the petitioners to pay cane price at Rs. 360/- per metric tonne prescribed in clause 14 of licences annexures-1 to 9.

(3.) Sri d.l.n. rao, the learned counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that the condition imposed under clause 14 of licences annexures-1 to 9 issued to the petitioners are without the authority of law in as much as the respondent 2 has not been conferred with any power either under the Provisions of sugarcane (control) Order, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'control order') or under the Provisions of Karnataka khandasari sugar manufacturers licencing Order, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'licencing order'). Elaborating his contention, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the price of sugarcane payable by producers of khandasari sugar can be fixed either by the central government or by the state government only after complying with the procedure prescribed under clause 4 of the control order; and in the present case the state government has not fixed the minimum price of the sugarcane to be paid by the petitioners to the sugarcane growers with the concurrence of the central government and as such it is not permissible for the respondent 2 to impose a condition in the licences issued to the petitioners directing them to pay minimum of Rs. 360/- per tonne of sugarcane to the growers of sugarcane. According to learned counsel, the licencing order only empowers licensing authority i.e., respondent 2 to impose such conditions as may be necessary to regulate the manufacture of sugar in the khandasari unit, and it does not empower the respondent 2 to impose any condition prescribing or restricting the price of the sugarcane to be purchased by the khandasari unit by the sugarcane growers. He further submitted that when there is a specific provision provided under the control order providing for the fixation of the price of the sugarcane by the state government with the concurrence of the central government by means of a notification issued on that behalf in the official gazette, it is not permissible for the respondents 1 to 6 to overcome the said provision of law by imposing a condition in the licences issued to the petitioners by fixing the price of the sugarcane to be purchased by them; the circular dated 28-7-1990, the copy of which has been produced as Annexure-C also cannot be relied upon by the respondents either to sustain the condition incorporated in clause 14 of the licences impugned in these petitions or in support of their plea that the petitioners are liable to pay minimum of Rs. 360/- per tonne of sugarcane to be purchased by them from the sugarcane growers; and the Annexure-C is only a circular and it does not even refer to the concurrence of the central government and therefore, the same cannot be relied upon by the respondents to sustain clause 14 of the licences impugned in these petitions. It is further submitted that Annexure-C would show that the decision was taken to fix the price of sugarcane only in respect of sugar factories and not in respect of khandasari sugar units and therefore, the price fixed in Annexure-C cannot be made as the basis for fixing the purchase price as part of conditions of licences issued to the petitioners.