← Library
Madras High CourtWP/15767/2021disposed of

The Nilgiri Bought Leaf Tea Manufacturers v. Union Of India

2021-08-26Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.08.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN W.P. No. 15767 of 2021 and WMP No. 16673 of 2021 The Nilgiri Bought Leaf Tea Manufacturer's Association, Represented by its President No.9, Mount Road Coonoor 642 102 The Nilgiris Tamil Nadu .. Petitioner

Versus

1. Union of India, Rep. by Secretary to Government, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Central Secretariat, New Delhi.

2. Tea Board of India, Rep. by Executive Director, Shell Wood, Club Road, P B No.6, Coonoor, Nilgiris 643 101.

.. Respondents Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner Association, dated 26.06.2021 seeking implementation of the Decision / Resolution passed by the second Respondent Board in Meetings No.236 and 237, dated 26.06.2018 and 30.10.2018, respectively, with regard to Para 30-A of the Tea Marketing Control Order, 2003.

For Petitioner : Mr. N. Vijay Narayan, Senior Advocate for Mr. E. Manoharan For Respondents : Mr. R. Subramanian, Additional Central Government Standing Counsel

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner Association, dated 26.06.2021 seeking implementation of the Decision / Resolution passed by the second Respondent Board in the Meetings No.236 and 237, dated 26.06.2021 and 30.10.2018, respectively, with regard to Para 30A of the Tea Marketing Control Order, 2003. 2.

The petitioner is an association of private bought leaf manufacturers, who buy green tea leaf from small tea growers, which the petitioner user in the process of manufacturing "Made Tea" which are sold in auctions held in Coonoor, Coimbatore and Cochin. It is submitted that until 2015, the proceeds realized by individual manufacturers in the auctions of a month for "Made Tea" were shared among the Growers and the Bought Leaf manufacturers by applying the price sharing Formula fixed under Paragraph 30 of the Tea Marketing Control Order (TMCO), which presently is 65:35. While so, in the year 2015, the first respondent brought in an Amendment to the TMCO by way of introduction of Para 30 A, which provided for fixation of a Minimum Bench Mark Price (District Green Leaf Average price) for green leaves procured from the growers at the beginning of every month on the basis of the District Average of the total sales of green leaves by all manufacturers in the previous month.

3. According to the petitioner, this price fixation methodology is impractical as the price is imposed on the manufacturers even before determining the exact price that would be realised by the manufactures through sale in the market during the particular month. It is stated that the price of the tea depends upon various factors and it may not be constant. Therefore, fixing bench mark price for all manufacturers, irrespective of their capacity and nature of holding would amount to treating equals with unequals. When the petitioner has highlighted the impracticability of the above methodology to the 2nd respondent Board, it was not considered at all. Therefore, the

petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P. No. 29448 of 2017, challenging the constitutional validity and virus of Para 30 A

(5) of TMCO. Thereafter, the issue with the fixation of minimum bench mark price was considered by the 2nd respondent Board in their 235 to 237th meeting and it was resolved that fixation of the bench mark price at the end of the month, based on the actual process in the said month, will be more practical and therefore an amendment to that effect to Para 30 A was required. Even though such a decision was taken and the minutes of the meeting was also placed before the Ministry/first respondent for approval, it is pending nearly for three years much to the chagrin of the petitioner association.

4.

The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the tea market faced unprecedented crises, the 2nd respondent Board allowed the manufacturers to deviate from the present price fixation method and to pay a price by applying the previous methodology and Price Sharing Formula. During the Covid-19 pandemic, the Tea Market suffered a major hit with the fall in prices, surplus production, lock down restrictions, health concerns etc. Despite the same, the 2nd respondent Board continued to fix bench mark price on the basis of the previous month's average and initiating recovery proceedings, forcing several manufacturers to discontinue the operations and procurement of green leaf temporarily due to inability to meet the price. In this regard, the petitioner sent a representation to the Ministry of Commerce and industry, dated 26.

06.2021 requesting to take a decision regarding the issue of fixation of district Green leaf Average Price under Para 30A of TMCO on the basis of the resolutions passed by the 2nd respondent Board. However, the first respondent has not passed any order thereof. Therefore, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner seeks for appropriate direction to the first respondent. 5.

On the above contentions of the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, this Court heard the learned counsel Additional Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents.

6.

Admittedly, the issue with respect to fixation of minimum bench mark price was opposed by the petitioner association by raising several objections. Such objections were considered by the second respondent Board in their 235 to 237th meeting resolving to fix bench mark price at the end of the

month, based on the actual process in the said month. An amendment to that effect was also made to Para 30 A of TMCO. For approval of the same, a proposal was placed before the first respondent for approval. It is alleged that for the past three years, such a proposal is pending with the first respondent much to the chagrin of the petitioner association. Having regard to the above facts, this Court hereby directs the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 26.06.2021 with regard to the implementation of the decision/resolution passed by the 2nd respondent Board in the Meeting No.236 and 237, dated 26.06.2018 and 30.10.2018, respectively, and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7.

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vum/rsh To

1. Union of India, Rep. by Secretary to Government, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Central Secretariat, New Delhi.

2. The Executive Director, Tea Board of India, Shell Wood, Club Road, P B No.6, Coonoor, Nilgiris 643 101.

+1cc to M/s.E.Manoharan, Advocate, S.R.No.43571 W.P.No.15767 of 2021 KSM(CO) SB(24/09/2021)