High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/306/2016

Crop Care Federation Of India And ANR v. UOI And ORS

2016-01-13Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Manmohan2 pages

$~61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 306/2016 & C.M.Nos.1245-1246/2016 CROP CARE FEDERATION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Petitioners Through Mr.Rajeev K.Virmani, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Ashish Kothari and Ms.Mansi Kumar, Advocates.

versus UOI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Mr.Vidu Mohan, Advocate for R-1 to 3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

O R D E R

% 13.01.2016 The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of the Minutes of Meeting of 360th Registration Committee, whereby it had resolved to grant a provisional registration under Section 9(3B) of the Insecticides Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") to respondent no.4/RFL.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the Registration Committee has rewarded respondent no.4/RFL by granting a provisional registration under Section 9(3B) of the Act without there being any application for grant of such a registration, and despite lack of jurisdiction to grant the same in view of the said insecticide being already registered.

Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 3 who appears on advance notice points out that by virtue of Section 11 of the Act,

power of revision has been conferred upon the Central Government. He states that the said respondents are willing to treat the present writ petition as a revision petition under Section 11 of the Act. He also assures this Court that the revision petition would be disposed of within a period of three months, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondent no.4. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 points out that as of today, the respondent no.4/RFL has not filed the application in prescribed revised Form I. On instruction of Mr.Neeraj, Law Officer, who is personally present in Court today, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 states that it is not anticipated that the respondent no.4/RFL would be granted a registration within the next three months.

Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present writ petition is directed to be treated as a revision petition under Section 11 of the Act, to be disposed of within a period of three months, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as also the respondent no.4. A copy of the speaking order disposing of the revision petition shall be communicated to the petitioner and respondent no.4 by registered AD post.

Dasti.

MANMOHAN, J JANUARY 13, 2016 KA