BHATIA SEWA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD THROUGH MEMBER VELABHAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURAL VELABHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner's Cooperative Society for an appropriate writ, direction and order quashing and setting aside the order dated 29.9.2008 passed by respondent no.2 and consequently to direct the respondent to immediately pay the insurance claim of Kharif 2005 season of Kalyanpur Taluka as per the Taluka Unit.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioners so pleaded in the petition that all the petitioners are registered cooperative societies registered under the provisions of Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act and their members are agriculturists carrying on agricultural activities in Kalyanpur Taluka in Jamnagar District. That the petitioner societies are affiliated through respondent no.4 Bank. That respondent no.4 Bank provides agricultural credit to its members and the petitioner societies obtain credit from respondent no.4 Bank. That the credit which the petitioners obtain from respondent no.4 Bank is disbursed to its members, which is insured under NAIS, which is a scheme of the Union of India for the welfare and benefit of the agriculturist. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioner societies are members of the District Level Federal Societies. That the District Central Cooperative Bank provides loans for agriculture related activities to its members society. That the District Central Bank is financed by the Gujarat State Cooperative Bank at the State Level and the NABARD is national level finance agency for Agriculture and Rural Development. It is the case of the petitioners that therefore, whole setup is such that NABARD is the main source of finance at the national level and at the State level the State Cooperative Bank are the source of finance and at the District level the District Central Bank are the source of finance for agriculture and rural development. The District Central Bank in turn finance to the primary agriculture cooperative society like petitioners.

(3.) Shri Vaghela, learned advocate for the petitioners has vehemently submitted that as such the decision of the concerned respondent in considering yield data of District wise is absolute illegal and contrary to the scheme. It is submitted that the decision taken by the concerned respondent to consider the unit as per the District is contrary to clause 9, 10 and 11 of the NAIS. It is submitted that considering the provision of NAIS the loss and damages was to be assessed on the basis of Taluka unit, exercise for was to be undertaken by the State Government. It is submitted that even the State Government declared the defined area (taluka unit) by its resolution dated 13.4.2005 and consequently Kalyanpur Taluka of Jamnagar District and kharif groundnut crop was notified under the scheme, therefore, it is submitted that the claims of a notified crops was required to be calculated on the basis of actual yield of particular year derived on the basis of average Crop Cutting Experiments result of Kalyanpur Taluka.