PRAVINBHAI VALLABHBHAI NARIYANA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions in the nature of public interest litigation are filed by different Sahakari Mandalies in the interest of their members who are agriculturists. As the issue involved in all these petitions is similar, all these petitions are heard together and being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the facts stated in Writ Petition (PIL) No.255 of 2016 are recorded in this order. 2. 1. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioner Sahakari Mandali is registered under the provisions of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The members of the petitioner "™s society are the agriculturists who have paid premium for the crop insurance to the respondent No.5 - Agricultural Insurance Company Ltd. It is stated that for the purpose of taking precaution of their crops the farmers have paid premium amount for the year 2015-2016 through the respondent No.5. It is stated that after the survey was conducted by the special team of the State Government for the purpose of total rainfall in the year 2015-2016, the respondent Revenue Department has declared particular area as partly drought affected area by issuing Government Resolution dated 01.04.2016. It is stated that after conducting further survey, another resolution dated 18.04.2016 was issued whereby certain other villages were also declared as partly drought affected area. The petitioner has mainly alleged that the respondents have given discriminatory treatment to certain villages by providing 21% claim amount to Bhanvad Taluka, whereas the respondents have granted 94% claim amount to the farmers of Porbandar Taluka, which is adjoining to the petitioner "™s Taluka. Petitioners got the said information under the Right to Information Act and thereafter filed the captioned petition in which the petitioner has prayed for the following relief/s:

(3.) Heard learned advocate Mr. M. A. Parekh for the petitioners, learned AGM Mr. K. M. Antani for the respondent - State and learned advocate Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati for the respondent - Insurance Company.