UPL LTD. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aforesaid Writ Petitions are materially connected in respect of an issue arising under the provisions of the Insecticides Act, 1968, and even though there is material difference in the facts and circumstances of the Writ Petitions, the question to be decided raised in these Writ Petitions are typical in nature and therefore I heard them together and propose to pass this common judgment. The facts and figures and documents contained in the W.P.(C) No. 15301/2019 is relied upon for disposal of the Writ Petitions and wherever required facts will be shown separately.

(2.) First petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 15301/2019, is a manufacturer and exporter of agro-chemicals and is operating from India. Second petitioner is a shareholder of the 1st petitioner Company. According to the petitioners, they are aggrieved by Exts. P2 to P4 letters dated 19.01.2019, 25.03.2019 and 02.05.2019 issued by the respondents, imposing prohibition in the State of Kerala, the product manufactured by the 1st petitioner company, namely, Cypermethrin 3% + Quinalphos 20% EC sold under the brand name 'Viraat'. As per the impugned directives, respondents have inter alia directed all agricultural officers in Kerala to (i) visit all shops and confirm that there is neither any illegal stock nor sale of the said product; (ii) not to prescribe the said product to farmers since the said product is not recommended by Kerala Agricultural University; (iii) direct petitioner No. 1 to take the said product back within one month and report before 30.05.2019. It is submitted that the impugned directives have been issued in view of the purported death of a person in Pathanamthitta District while spraying insecticides. The paramount contention advanced by the petitioners is that, the impugned directives are without jurisdiction, illegal and wholly arbitrary, since the State Government is not vested with any powers to issue such directives on account of the statutory stipulations contained under the Insecticides Act and the allied Rules.

(3.) The 2nd respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit along with various documents and notification issued by the State Government in respect of the decision taken by the State Government to conduct organic farming within the State of Kerala as early as in 2010. The allegations, claims and demands contained in the Writ Petition are denied and among other contentions it is stated that the product 'Viraat' manufactured by the petitioners is a restricted compound by State of Kerala as per G.O.(M.S) No. 128/2015 dated 28.07.2015. That apart it is stated that, the Kerala State, accounts for 1.22% land in India, and the State is mostly urbanised, and the lands are not being cultivated. The cultivation is restricted to 53.50% of the total area. Therefore the manufacturers of insecticide does not suffer any grave loss compared to the harmful effect of scientific use of insecticides. Two farm labourers spraying 'viraat' died in Peringara in Pathanamthitta District and immediately reports were called and action under S. 21(d) of the Act, 1968, was taken to prevent the sale of the insecticide in order to avoid further casualties. It is also pointed out that, 'viraat' is an insecticide approved for the pest control of cotton and brinjal by the Central Insecticides Board and Registration Committee (in short CIB and RC). Cotton is not cultivated anywhere in Kerala.