← Library
Madras High CourtWP/6818/2004disposed of

The Tamil Nadu Food Grains v. The Commissioner, Co Operative

2022-06-07Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.06.2022 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.No.6818 of 2004 The Tamil Nadu Food Grains Merchants Association Limited, Rep.by its Honourary Secretary V.Dhanasekaran S/o.Vembu Nagar No.342, East Masi Street Madurai 625 001.

... Petitioner -Vs1.The Commissioner Co-operative Food and Consumer Protection Department Government of Tamil Nadu Chepauk Chennai 600 005.

2.Secretary to the Government Department of Revenue Government of Tamil Nadu Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.

...Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to refund all the security deposit and additional security deposits received under Clause 11 of the Tamil Nadu Essential Trade Articles (Regulation of Trade) Order, 1984, in respect to those commodities exempted by virtue of G.S.R.104(E) dated 15.2.2002 as amended by G.S.R.490 (E) dated 16.6.2003 issued by the Central Government, to the members of the Petitioner Association together with interest at 12% per annum from 15.3.2002 till payment. For Petitioner : M/s.Elizapath Ravi for Mr.P.Kumanan For Respondents : Mr.U.Bharanidharan Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed by the Tamil Nadu Food Grains Merchants Association, seeking for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to refund the security deposit and additional security deposits received from the Members of the petitioner Association with interest. 2.The case of the petitioner is that the Petitioner Association was formed with an object to safeguard the interest of the Traders dealing in food grains and pulses in the State of Tamil Nadu. According to the Petitioner Association, the Traders belonging to the Petitioner Association had applied for license to deal with various commodities and at the time of applying for the license and renewal, they also made caution deposit and additional deposits.

3.The further case of the Petitioner Association is that the Central Government issued notifications whereby the requirement of license to deal with various commodities was completely relaxed and the Traders were permitted to deal with those commodities without the requirement of any permit or license. In view of this development, the Petitioner Association has taken a stand that the requirement for the security deposit or the additional security deposit will no longer survive and hence, may be refunded to the members belonging to the Petitioner Association. Representations were also made in this regard by the Petitioner Association on 28.8.2003 and 27.10.2003 and since the same was not acted upon, the present writ petition was filed seeking for appropriate directions.

4.Heard Mr.Elizapath Ravi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.U.Bharanidharan, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

5.The learned counsel for the Petitioner Association submitted that the 1st respondent passed an impugned order dated 27.2.2004 whereby, it was informed that since wheat products, pulses and chillies were not included in the notification of the Central Government as republished by the State Government, it would not be possible to refund the amount pertaining to those three commodities. This order was put to challenge by filing W.P.No.6817 of 2004 and this writ petition was dismissed as infructuous by an order dated 12.12.2008. The learned counsel submitted that the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous only on the ground that the above said commodities were in fact included in the notification issued by the Central Government. The learned counsel therefore submitted that the members of the Petitioner Association are entitled for the refund of the security deposit and additional security deposit for all those commodities for which they obtained license and renewal of license.

6.In the considered view of this Court, the issue involved in this writ petition falls in a narrow campus and it will suffice if a direction is issued to the 1st respondent to deal with the representations made by the Petitioner Association, seeking for the refund of the security deposit and additional security deposit, within a time frame. In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to deal with the representation made by the Petitioner Association on 27.10.2003 and take a decision within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The Petitioner Association shall make a fresh representation to the 1st respondent along with a copy of the earlier representations and relevant records and also a copy of this order.

7.This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KP To 1.The Commissioner Co-operative Food and Consumer Protection Department Government of Tamil Nadu Chepauk Chennai 600 005.

2.Secretary to the Government Department of Revenue Government of Tamil Nadu Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.

+1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.NO. 33071 +1 cc to Mr.P.Raja, Advocate Sr.NO. 33000 W.P.No.6818 of 2004 VG II(CO) A.SK(17/06/2022)