TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (4) TMI 302
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ₹ 400/- fixed by the Government. 2. The directions issued by the Full Bench are as under: "We are therefore of the view, that unless provisions for the following arc made in it, the State Order will not be valid (i) The sugarcane &rowers who are not members of the factory or factories to which they are required to supply their sugarcane shall be paid for the sugarcane supplied by them the price calculated at the market rate prevailing in the locality at the date of the sale; (ii) The market rate may be as agreed between the parties, namely, the sugarcane grower and the factory or factories concerned. If there is any dispute over it, the same should be resolved by an independent authority which may be created under the Order such as the one under clause'12 of the present Order. The authority concerned should decide the dispute expeditiously after hearing the parties and by a speaking order, (iii) No unauthorised deductions on any account should be made by the factory from the price to be paid to the sugarcane grower without his consent. The State Order should provide for a machinery similar to the above to hear and grant to the sugarcane grower, expeditious relief i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....feature of post-1951 development noticed by the Commission was setting up of sugar factories largely in the cooperative sector due to Government policy of giving preference to cooperative societies in the matter of licensing. In respect of State of Maharashtra the Commission observed that sugar industry in Maharashtra was progressing very fast and the sugar production in Maharashtra was expected to reach 16.37 lakh metric tonnes and the State was to become the largest producer of sugar in the country. Today the State accounts for nearly 30% of the sugar output. The national output of sugar for 1991-92, 19-9293 and 1993-94 was 134 106 and 96 lakh metric tonnes respectively. The output of Maharashtra was 42, 36 and 27 lakh tonnes for the corresponding years. 4.While granting protection to the sugar factory the Government did not ignore the interest of sugarcane growers. It is the basic rather the only raw material for sugar. It is grown by cultivators who were usually exploited or at least were in danger of being exploited. Therefore, the Government agreed for fixing price of cane. At a conference called by the Government of India in 1933 representatives of cane growers asked for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed for sugarcane related to a basic recovery of 8.5% with a premium for every 0. 1% increase in recovery on proportionate basis. It also recommended that the sales realisation from sugar after expenses should be shared with the cane growers who execute agreement for supply of cane and fulfil their contract. Both these recommendations were accepted. The latter has been incorporated as paragraph 5A in the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 order for short). The minimum price for cane is fixed for growers throughout the country and recommendations of Bhargava Commission are being followed both in fixing minimum price of cane, and payment of additional price in accordance with formula framed by it appended as Schedule 11 to 1966 Order. 6. In the State of Maharashtra it was the experience of the Government that there were cyclic ups and downs in sugarcane production in the State which adversely affected some of the sugar factories, particularly those which were identified as sick and financially weak. The Government found that in times of shortage of sugarcane crop, in the absence of statutory provisions earmarking areas for drawal of cane it became difficult for certain factories to ge....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....actory as specified in the schedule pertaining to that factory. Clause (3) of the Order provides that having regard to the crushing capacity of sugar factories and the yield of sugarcane in the reserved areas, and the need for production of sugar, the area as specified in the schedule, shall be reserved for the sugar factory with a view to enabling it to purchase quantity of sugarcane required by it. Sub-clause (2) of Clause 3 prohibits any sugar factory to purchase cane or accept supplies of cane from cane growers except from the area reserved for that factory. The only exception to It is contained in Clauses 4 and 5 of the Order. Clause 4 deals with grant of licence and Clause 5 regulates supply of sugarcane empowering a permit officer to allow a sugar factory to purchase cane from areas other than the reserved for it under Clause 3 provided he is satisfied that the circumstances mentioned in the clause existed. The order was amended in 1987, 1988 and 1989. Sub-clause (1A) was added after sub-clause (1) in Clause 3 of the Order issued in 1984 by the Maharashtra Sugar Factories (Reservation of Areas and Regulation of Crushing and Sugarcane Supply) (Second Amendment) Order, 1987 an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....utory provision or the Constitution as the licence for,crushing the sugarcane was granted by the Central Government merit under the provisions of Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. The Bench repelled the challenge that the order was arbitrary or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Nor it agreed with claim of nonmembers of the cooperative societies that the prohibition in the Order from becoming members or obligation to supply cane to the factory in the reserved area was unreasonable or arbitrary. The Bench observed: "With the sole intention of avoiding cutthroat competition between the different sugar factories as well as the sugarcane growers, the impugned order has been issued. In this context, it cannot be forgotten that the Cooperative Societies Act has been enacted keeping in view the Directive Principles and the State Policy as enshrined in the Constitution. The cooperative movement in the ultimate analysis is socio-economic and moral movement. It is a part of the scheme of decentralisation of wealth and power. Cooperative capitalism is neither co- operation nor socialism. On the other hand, co-operation is a substitute for self-interest of an i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the restrictions on the freedom to sell and purchase the sugarcane except to and by the factories in whose favour the Reservation Order was issued. The Bench held that the Order issued by the Central Government in 1966 did not provide for fixation of the maximum price of sugarcane to be supplied by the sugarcane grower to the sugar factories. The Full Bench observed that the Aurangabad Bench had issued the directions permitting the growers to sell their sugarcane at the best price to different factories only because there was no machinery to hear the sugarcane growers before fixing the price and redress their grievance. The Bench found that this direction had not been complied. It thereafter considered the question of fixation of price by dividing the sugarcane growers in two categories one, who are members of any co-operative society and the others who are nonmembers. It held that since those growers who were members of the Society had to enter into an agreement under the bye-laws framed which were the same in all co-operative societies they could not make any grievance against fixation of price. It found that even otherwise before the Government which fixed the price they we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te could not see any justification for the court to interfere in matters of economic policy and the direction of the Full Bench according to him was violative of the scheme of the Act. Sri Dholakia, yet another senior counsel appearing for the State did not find any rationale to distinguish between controlled price and the market price as once the price, of any commodity was statutorily fixed under the orders issued by the Government then that alone became the market price. Sri Venugopal the learned senior counsel appearing for private undertakings urged that the Act visualised water tight compartmentalisation of the Order issued under it to balance the interests of consumers and when the Government did not fix any maximum price but provided for payment of minimum price only there was no scope to import the concept of higher price or market price. According to him the rationale for price fixation did no suffer from any infirmity nor it caused an prejudice to the cane growers. Sri R. Nariman the learned senior counsel appearing for joint stock companies urged that payment of market price would result in closing down of smaller units as price structure was co-related with yield and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rea year after year, the nonmembers are under no such obligation; they are, free to raise such crops as they choose. The argument further was that the economy of each sugar factory was different for various reasons it was also not possible to ensure an uniform price by all the factories. And if every sugar factory is compelled to pay price at ₹ 700/- a tonne, as some factories are paying, most of them would go out of market which would cause incalculable damage to the rural economy of the State. If these societies are to be kept alive, it is necessary that a separate price is fixed for each factory having regard to its own economy and other relevant factors. Neither the members can complain of it nor the non- members. So far as the questions of law are concerned, the learned counsel submitted that neither the Central Government nor the State Government made any order under Section 3(2)(f) of the Act; hence, the was no obligation upon them to ensure the price as contemplated by Section 3(3)(c). It was urged that even if it assumed for the sake of argument that a order under Section 3(2)(f) must be deemed to have been made by necessary implication, even then Section 3(3)(c) mus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be used as a lever to compel growers to become members of the cooperative societies. There is no such compulsion under the Cooperative Societies Act and such a compulsion cannot be brought about by the Reservation of Areas Order. The nonmembers cannot be punished by compelling them to sell their cane to uneconomic and inefficient factories at the price such factories can afford, i.e., at a price far lower than the true value and market price of the cane. The members may be so compelled because they may have a stake in the survival of those societies but the non-members have no such ties to the factory. Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India entitles a citizen of this country not to join a society or an association if he does not wish to. He cannot be compelled by law to join a society or an association. No person can be compelled to walk into these societies, which are in truth "debtor colonies". Inasmuch as the State has failed to provide or to ensure the market price as contemplated by Section 3(3)(c) of the Act, the Full Bench was right in declaring that the non-members are entitled to sell their sugarcane to whomsoever they like and at whatever price they can o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nimum price of cane paid by two factories cannot be same. For instance, the normal recovery in the State of Maharashtra is stated to bell.05%. In the year 1987-88 the minimum price fixed was ₹ 19.50 per quintal. The highest and lowest price paid for the sugarcane in the Ahmednagar District during 1987-88 was ₹ 366/- and ₹ 240/ by Sangamner Sahkari Sakkar Karkhana and Jagdamba Sahkari Sakkar Karkhana respectively. The recovery of Sangamner SSK Ltd. was 11.64% whereas the recovery of Jagdamba SSK Ltd. was 10.36%. It was explained that difference of 1.28% between recovery of sugar by the two factories resulted in difference of sugar production per tonne to extent of 12.8 kg. and the realisation too was ₹ 64/- per tonne more. This difference got reflected in the price fixation. 11. The next is the State Advised Price. Every State has its own method to determine it. The power is assumed under Acts of the State Legislature or orders issued by the Governments. For instance, in the State of Haryana a Sugarcane Central Board is constituted under -Section 3 of the Punjab Sugarcane (Regulation of Purchase and Supply) Act 1953 headed by the Chief Minister and other hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h growers whereas according to respondents it was paid by the Banks and the nonmembers did not enter into any agreement. Since the parties were at variance on an issue of fact they were granted time on 24th February 1995 to file further affidavits clarifying their stand. From the affidavits filed it now transpires that the loans are normally advanced by the village societies or rural banks to the farmers on the certificate issued by the sugar factories showing cane plantation, acreage, date of plantation, etc. Although the factum of agreement between the cultivator and the sugar factory is riot clearly admitted in the reply filed on behalf of the respondent but apart from those cultivators who do not need any loan for growing the crop whose percentage appears to be negligible, it appears by and large rather the uniform practice is that a tripartite arrangement is arrived between the cultivator, the loaning society and the sugar factory. The loan is advanced on basis of the certificate issued by the sugar factory and it is the sugar factory which ultimately repays the amount due to the loaning society out of the price of cane to be paid to the cultivator, Such agreements were recomm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Mechanism of fixation of cane price Receipts - Financial Results - ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. Sale of Sugar Add - Value of the as on 30/9 of} } Levy and Free sale closing stocks } at assumed prices. the year. } Deduct - value of the opening} stocks of the year } 2.Add or deduct profit or loss from Ancillary Units. 3.Add - other receipts from a) Sales of molasses Press mud Bagasse. b) Miscellaneous receipts. c) Rebates -------- (1) + (2) + (3) (R) ------- Expenditure I. Cane cost (a) Govt. of India minimum price linked with actual recovery deducting the average harvesting/ transport charges. II. Expenditure relating to cane - Commission to Harvesting and Transport contract Khodaki etc. III. Harvesting & Transport charges. IV. Cane Purchase Tax. V. Conversion charges. a) Store consumption b) Electrical charges c) Outside repairs d) Salaries/wages e) Overheads VI. Interest Payable. 1) Capital loans and deposits (NRD/RD) 2) Working Capital VII. Bonus - Minimum 8.33% VIII. Education Fund under section 68 Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. Audit Fees. Other Provision. DSI/Sakhar Sangh ----------- Grand Total ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the notified levy prices as on the 30th September.] Explanation. - In this Schedule "Sugar" means any form of sugar containing more than ninety per cent. sucrose]." ------------------------------------------------------------- 15.A comparison of the two would indicate that there is not much difference the two. In the latter too the cost incurred in producing sugar has to be deducted fro the receipts. In any case since the grow is paid either the State Advised Price Additional Cane Price whichever is high no prejudice can be said to be caused nonmembers. In the affidavit filed on 10 March 1995 it is stated that the final price determined for the earlier year is the advance price for the next year. For instance, if amount 'A' was fixed as final State Advised Price at the end of 1993-94 for a factory then that becomes the advance pn. for 1994-95. It has been explained the the final State Advised Price is fixed basis of detailed statement submitted the Sugar Commissioner giving a detailed operational financial picture of the working of the sugar factories such as sugar cane crushing, sugar recovery, sugar bags produced, quantity sold as levy and free, income from oth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rolled economy. Second, there is no machinery in the State to determine the State Advised Price for non-members as 95% of the sugar factories being in cooperative sector the fixation of price under the bye-laws was always considered to be legal. And rightly so. Therefore, any determination of price by an authority under the bye-laws is valid for cane growers attached to a sugar factory in reserved area. Third, entire concept of minimum and maximum price for cane appears to be out of place. As pointed out by the Commission minimum price is fixed on quality formula. Further, average recovery of the normal crushing period was preferred according to Commission as against average recovery of the optimum period. All this results in payment of adequately reasonable price which comprises of not only cost of cultivation but profit as well. It does not stop there. The payment of additional price or final State Advised Price on profits obtained by a factory as indicated earlier is also paid. The price thus being paid on recovery of cane and profits made from sale of sugar is not minimum but optimum price which is paid to a cane grower. The fourth and the most important is that the advance p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... shall be bound to pay same cane price to non-members as members. A nonmember is also entitled to share the profits which are worked out at the end of the season. There is thus practically no difference between a member and non-member so far supply of cane or its price is concerned. A member is no doubt entitled to some facilities such as running of other business or availing the education facility etc. run by the cooperative societies but that has nothing to do with cane price or its supply. As a matter of fact the sale of by-products etc. is shown as receipt while calculating additional price or final State Advised price. 18. With this background it may now be examined whether provision in the State Zoning Order suffers from any drawback for not providing any machinery to hear the individual non-members and also whether the fixation of price by the Director of Sugar Factories or the State Government under bye-law 64 framed under Cooperative Societies Act can be said to be binding on members only thus entitling nonmembers to sell their cane at market price. The exercise of pricing is undertaken by a Committee in accordance with guidelines provided after taking into consideration ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ected, the individual members cannot claim that the price fixed was not fair or just. 19. Therefore, absence of any machinery in the State Order for hearing nonmembers could not destroy effectiveness of pricing. Even otherwise the price fixation in a controlled economy may not be bad so long it is in accordance with the policy formulated by the Government and the decision by the Committee of Experts is not found to be arbitrary. It cannot be assailed only because cane growers of one area are getting better price than the other. The difference in price arising due to application of principle uniformly is neither bad nor arbitrary. It may be that since the price is linked with yield it may cause hardship to one set of growers as they might be deprived of better price as compared to his neighbour due to deficient functioning of the factory but in a welfare State and controlled economy individual hardship cannot override the larger social interest. 20.Reason for government intervention to fix the price has been explained earlier. It was to increase sugar production. It continues even today. While doing so the Government ensured stable and assured income to the growers. That is why....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Directors of the factory will give advances to the members against the price of the sugarcane supplied by them, by prior permission of the Director of Sugar and the Deputy Registrar of the Co- operative Societies and in accordance with their directions and after making deductions for certain purposes. Bye-law 64 states that the price of the sugarcane supplied by the members, shall be as fixed by the Board of Directors every year. The Board of Directors will fix the price according to the constitution, the object and the bye- laws of the society and after taking into consideration the financial transactions and conditions of the year. The bye-law then makes an exception to this general rule and states that so long as the share capital invested by the Government is not refunded completely and/or the loan taken from the Industrial Finance Corporation or from any Central Financial Institution supplying funds for fixed capital assets is not fully repaid, the price to be paid to the members shall be that as fixed by the State Government. For the purposes of our discussion, we will refer to this period briefly as the debt-period. Bye-law 64A states that whenever it becomes necessar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....exploit the cane growers the submission that it did not apply to non-members cannot be accepted. The order does not make any distinction between members and non-members. Nor does it visualise separate mechanism for price fixation for the two. The price is fixed, may be, by the Board of Directors or by the State Government under bye-laws but the prices are for the reserved area. The Central Government did not fix any maximum price obviously because the conditions in the agricultural sector differed from State to State. Therefore, it having fixed a minimum price expects the State to offer remunerative price to its cultivators. In a controlled economy the price fixation machinery is to be determined by the State Government or under the 1966 Order in the manner provided therein. Since in Maharashtra 95% of the sugar factories are in the cooperative sector the price is fixed by the Government as it has substantial financial stock. But so long the price fixation does not suffer from any infirmity or it is held to be prejudicial to cane grower so as to benefit the State or the financial institution it cannot be held to be bad. Therefore once the price fixation has been undertaken and p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... obligation to lift the cane from the field, crush it produce sugar and pay to the grower not only the minimum price but also share the profit with him. 23. In the affidavit filed by the Dy. Secretary of the State it has been explained that while forming the zones for the sugar factories besides capacity and requirement of sugarcane to the sugar factory the physiological nature of sugarcane is also taken into consideration. It is stated that crop of sugarcane is a perishable commodity and it has to be crushed at the earliest after its harvesting for which the optimum distance of 40 kms has been laid down by the Union of India, therefore, zones of the factories are normally between 35 to 40 kms radius around the factory. The affidavit points out that in the process of zoning many Talukas in the State pockets where there are no sugar factories have been left out because those areas do not fall within the radius of 35 to 40 kms. However, from such pockets where the sugarcane is produced such sugarcane is allotted to the neighbouring needy factories in accordance with the Maharashtra Sugar Zoning Order and the cultivators supplying sugarcane from such free areas, even though they are ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en seriously affected. 24. Having discussed the pricing of sugarcane, the near similarity between members and nonmembers of a cooperative society qua supply of cane and payment of price, the nonfeasibility of hearing every individual grower by the Committee before fixation of the price of cane and applicability of uniform rate of cane in the reserved area both for members and non-members it may now be examined whether supply of cane by the cane growers under the Zoning Order issued by the State of Maharashtra is a compulsory sale within meaning of clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act so as to attract Section 3(3)(c) of the Act. Both these sub-sections arc part of Section 3 of the Act which is the main Section and is directed towards achieving the objective of the Act to provide, in the interest of general public, for the control of the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce in certain commodities. Sub-section (1) of Section 3 spells out the general power of the Government to control production, supply and distribution of essential commodities if it is of opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do for maintaining or increasing suppli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eld in stock or produced or received by him, or (b) in the case of any such commodity which is likely to be produced or received by him, to sell the whole or a specified part of such commodity when produced or received by him, to the Central Government or a State Government or to an officer or agent of such Government or to a Corporation owned or controlled by such Government or to such other person or class of persons and in such circumstances as may be specified in the order." This sub-Section came up for interpretation by this Court in Union of India & Anr. v. Cynamide India Ltd. & Anr. (1 987) 2 SCC 720. It was held: " an order under Section 3(2)(f) is a specific order directed to a particular individual for the purpose of enabling the Central Government to purchase a certain quantity of the commodity from the person holding it. It is an order for a compulsory sale. " It was reiterated in Shri Malaprabha (supra) and it was observed: "It is a specific order directed to a particular individual in order to enable the Central Government to purchase a certain quantity of commodity from the person holding it. It is an order of compulsory sale. " 26. Can....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e society, therefore, it was contrary to the statutory equitable pricing system consequent to the compulsory sale under the Act. It was urged that the fixation of price was irrational and unfair as it had no bearing or relation to the yield of the crop or to the predicament of the farmer. The learned counsel vehemently submitted that any pricing resorted to either by the cooperative societies or by the State Government solely and exclusively in relation to the management of cooperative factories was an extraneous and irrelevant consideration. The learned counsel urged that since price fixation was not delegated under the 1966 Order any action by the State Government or cooperative societies to resort to price fixation which was unfair and unjust to the nonmembers was contrary to the Act. The submission proceeded on assumption that the fixation of price was in respect of a commodity which was directed to be compulsorily sold under the orders issued by the Government. As explained earlier the assumption does not appear to be well founded. The entire edifice of the submission was built on the compulsive nature of transaction involved in supply of cane and payment of price But what wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was specific both in letter and intent and it was clear from the schedules that all growers could supply cane only to an identifiable sugar factory the necessary inference that arose was that it was a compulsory sale and, therefore, the respondents were entitled for a market price under Section 3(3)(c). Help was also taken from Shri Malaprabha (supra) and it was urged that where there were general orders which identified the seller and the buyer and both were aware of the nature of transaction that the sale had to be made to identifiable designated person the sale was nothing but a compulsory sale. It was urged that a provision with in built specific identification could not be used as a device to disguise the real nature of transaction. None of the submissions appear to be well founded. As observed in Shri Malaprabha (supra) and Anakapalle (supra) the provisions of Section 3(3)(c) could apply only where there was a specific order of sale. In absence of any such order the inference that the learned counsel for respondent has attempted to draw cannot be said to be justified. What is contemplated under Section 3(3)(c) is an order of a compulsory sale and not a compulsion arising out ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rudely must be avoided. 31.Consequently the first two directions issued by the Full Bench on price fixation cannot be upheld. As regards third direction it has been explained in the affidavit filed in pursuance to order dated 24th February 1995 which substantially remains uncontroverted that the deductions under bye-law 65 are made for the Chief Minister's Relief Fund, Small Saving Schemes, Cane Development Fund, Vasantdada Sugar Research Institute, Area Development Fund etc.. The details as to how the deductions are made have also been mentioned. It is true that they are made in exercise of power under bye- law 65 which does not apply to non-members. But these deductions being for the general welfare of the society it cannot be said that they are either bad or they suffer from any infirmity. The deposits deducted unlike members arc refundable and they carry same interest as is paid to members. A non-member who is sharing in profits of the sugar production cannot be heard to say that he has no obligations towards the society because he is not a member of any co-operative society. 32.With the conclusion thus arrived the other issues are rendered academic. Suffice it to say that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eeping away rather than delving in such hazardous zone. All the same from the chart filed along with the affidavit in C.A. No.523 of 1989 it appears the factories having better recovery have been permitted to pay lower price as compared to the factories the recovery of which is lower. For instance at item Nos.14 and 15 the two karkhanas, Ashok and Dayaneshwar, arc shown to have recovery of 10.21% and 10.53% respectively. Yet the price paid in 1985-86 was ₹ 270/ - per tonne by Ashok whereas it was ₹ 250/- by Dayaneshwar. Similarly serial nos.21 and 22 the factories, Sanjiwani and Sangamrer with same recovery, that is, 11. 3 1 % have been made to pay ₹ 3 64/ -, ₹ 330/- and ₹ 240/- for years 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88 and ₹ 391/-, ₹ 348/- and ₹ 366/- respectively. Then again at serial no.37 and 38 Shriram and Ajinkyatara the recovery percentage was 10. 84 and 11. 75 respectively and the price paid was ₹ 311.50, ₹ 300/- and ₹ 285/ - and ₹ 305.50, ₹ 330/- and ₹ 415/respectively. It has not been explained how this difference has arisen. Such wide disparities are bound to create distrust. In price mechan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oppage of nearby sugar factory due to mechanical break down, labour unrest, lock-out or any other reason. (d) In the event of cane grower or cane growers from the area reserved for a particular factory declining to supply cane to the said factory on account of any of the following reasons, if found justified by the Permit Officer (i) Non-payment or late payment of cane price by the sugar factory; or (ii) Non-fulfilment of any of the obligations by the sugar factory arising out of agreement between the cane grower or cane growers and the sugar factory; or (iii) Discrimination by the sugar factory in harvesting of cane and thereby causing loss to the cane grower or the cane growers; Provided that before passing any order under this sub-clause, for any of the above reasons, the Permit Officer shall give the parties concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard in person or through the authorised representative." 36.Clause (5) prescribes the situations in which one sugar factory will be permitted by the prescribed authority to purchase sugarcane from the zone of another sugar factory. It does not provide for the cane grower seeking a permit for sale of his cane to anothe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....worked out in the manner indicated in Schedule 11 of Control Order of 1966 is more advantageous and beneficial to the growers. If it be so it may opt for the same as it would avoid tedious exercise by the Ministerial Committee and have the benefit of uniformity; (c) The Committee may further examine whether ₹ 600/- which has been paid by the factories to the non-growers under interim order passed by this Court would not be a reasonable minimum price for 1995-96 and may furnish the basis for fixation of price for future years; (d) It may also suggest ways and means for improving yield by the sugar factories and reducing overhead expenses and eliminating, possible, paper loss; (e) It would further be in interest of the Government to ask the Committee to examine if the shortcomings pointed out by the Full Bench in other regard can be rectified and rationalised; and (f) The Committee may examine whether byelaw 65 should be applied to nonmembers or not. 38. Although the price fixation has not been found to suffer from any infirmity yet due to passage of time, nearly eight or nine years, since this price fixation was challenged and with rise of price all around it appears expe....