P K DEIVASIGAMANI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed these writ petitions with identical relief. The learned counsel appearing on both sides advanced common arguments and therefore, with the consent of counsel for both sides, the writ petitions are taken up for hearing together and are disposed of by this common order.

(2.) (i) The writ petitioners, who are respectable citizens in Erode District, have filed the present writ petitions seeking for appropriate direction to the official respondents to take appropriate action against the seventh respondent association, whose activities are detrimental to the turmeric producers at large. According to the petitioners, the first is agriculturists in Erode District engaged in production of turmeric and also President of the Turmeric Farmers'Association. The second Petitioner is the President of the Tamil Nadu Agriculturists Association. The third petitioner is the District President of Tamil Nadu State Turmeric Farmers Association affiliated to the Turmeric Farmers Association of India. The fourth Petitioner is the President of Kalingarayan Pasana Sabhan, who is engaged in espousing the cause of farmers in general and the turmeric farmers in particular, in and around Erode District. The fifth petitioner is the President of Tadapalli Arakkankottai Pasana Vivasayigal Sangam.

(3.) The respondents have resisted the writ petitions by filing separate counters. The sixth respondent/Market Committee filed a counter affidavit tracing the history of the Act. Under section 8 of the Act, whenever a product is notified in the area no person shall set up, establish or use or continue or allow to be continued any place for the purchase or sale, storage, weighment, measurement or processing of any agricultural produce, or operate as a broker, weighman, measurer, trader, warehouseman or in any other capacity in relation to buying and selling of any notified agricultural produce, except under and in accordance with the conditions of a licence granted to him by the Market Committee. The sixth respondent also defined the term "trader" specified in the Act. According to the sixth respondent, any violation of the procedures contemplated udner the Act has to be enforced only by the sixth respondent in accordance with the Act, Rules and Bye-laws made thereunder. According to them, the seventh respondent has obtained a licence as contemplated under Section 8 of the Act and therefore, the action of the seventh respondent is not in violation of the Act or Rules. The allegation of the petitioner that the entire trade is being conducted for the benefit of middleman is denied. According to the sixth respondent, lands situate in Perundurai in Erode Town was originally selected for establishment of the integrated turmeric complex and the Government also issued G.O. Ms.No.165, Agricultural Department dated 07.05.1999 was issued for acquiring the lands. Thereafter, representations were made by all concerned to shift the proposed integrated turmeric complex from Perundruai to some other place within a radius of 5 kilometers from the Erode Town. At this juncture, the seventh respondent made an offer stating that they have purchased 25 acres of land in the name of their members in Sempampalayam Village i.e., Nasiyannur and Vellarasampatti and it shall be used for establishing the turmeric complex. It was further stated that the seventh respondent is willing to gift the lands to Government. On the basis of such assurance given by the seventh respondent, field inspections were also made by the 2nd and 4th respondents. Thereafter, another order in G.O. Ms. No.41, Agricultural Department dated 06.02.2004 was issued for establishment of the turmeric complex in Nasiyanur and Vellarasampatti Villages inter alia permitting the sixth respondent to get the lands as donation from the seventh respondent. The Government also sanctioned a sum of Rs.11.32 crores for this purpose. However, when the sixth respondent demanded the seventh respondent to give the lands as promised by them, by letter dated 19.11.2004, the seventh respondent has stated that land owners, who were in possession of 11.01 acres are unwilling to offer their lands and therefore, resort shall be made to acquire those lands by invoking the provisions of Land Acquisition Act. When clarification was made with regard to the remaining lands, the seventh respondent handed over a draft gift settlement deed for gifting 15.07 acres of lands. Later on, it was found that the extent of lands agreed to be given by the seventh respondent is not sufficient to execute the project. Therefore, the very purpose of establishing the market facility in that area was dropped. Thereafter, the second respondent requested the fourth responddent to find an alternative site as the seventh respondent refused to handover the lands, as promised. Thereafter, poromboke lands measuring 2.97.0 hectare situate at Karumandi Sellipalayam in Perundruai Taluk was identified for establishment of a turmeric complex. It is further stated by the sixth respondent that the present building where the seventh respondent is carrying on the business has not been approved, however, it shall not be a bearing under the Act nor it is the responsibility of the sixth respondent to enforce the implementation of the building plan approval. It is further stated that the earlier writ petition in WP No. 366 of 2012 filed by Kalingarayan Pasana Sabai, Erode was closed by this Court as at that point of time, the seventh respondent was not conducting any auction of turmeric. It is categorically stated by the sixth respondent in para No.16 of the counter that seventh respondent aplied for licence for conducting turmeric auction in Sempampalayam Village and as per Section 5 (1) of the Act, it is the duty of the sixth respondent to enforce the provisions of the Act, Rules and Bye-laws made under this Act in the notified area.