APHC010336122025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 16763 OF 2025 Between: M/s. Sree Sannidhi Foods Private Limited, Having its registered office Petapalli Village, Kamaguttapalli Post, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor Andhra Pradesh 517124 Kumarswamy Naidu at Represented by its Authorised Signatory Mr. L. ...PETITIONER AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Special Chief Secretary, Department of Agriculture Pradesh 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh 3. The Mandal Revenue Officer cum The Mandal Level Incharge Officer, assigned for M/s Sree Sannidhi Foods Pvt. Ltd Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh A.P Secretariat, Velagapudi, Andhra ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2'"'^ and 3'"^ Respondents in imposing and insisting the Petitioner Company to procure the may be mango loads more than its capacity and feasibility by issuing un authorised Arrival booking forms/booking tokens in the name of the Petitioners company and interfering into the processing function of the Petitioners plant as illegal, high handed, arbitrary and in violation of the provisions of Article 14,19(1 )(g) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the guidelines Respondent vide proceedings Proc.Rc. issued by the 2 nd No.DDH/Mango/2025 dated 07.06.2025and consequently direct the respondents to limit their interference to the extent of noting the details of the farmers for the purpose of providing subsidy as per the guidelines issued in proceedings vide Proc.Rc. No.DDH/Mango/2025 dated 07.06.2025. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Respondents and their staff from interfering into the process rd restrain the 3 of procurement of mangoes by entering in and around the petitioner company premises including issuance of Arrival booking forms/booking tokens pending the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. A. DIVYA Counsel for the Respondent No.1:GP FOR AGRICULTURE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: \/ APHC010336122025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [^:s [3329] TUESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 16763/2025 ! Between: SREESANNIDHl FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT PETAPALLI VILLAGE, KAMAGUTTAPALLI POST, 517124 KUMARSWAMY NAIDU 1.M/S PUTHALAPATTU MANDAL, CHITTOOR ANDHRA PRADESH REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. L. ...PETITIONER AND 1 STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL DEPARTMENTOF AGRICULTURE, A.P CHIEF SECRETARY SECRETARIAT,VELAGAPUDI,ANDHRA PRADESH DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA 2.THE PRADESH MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER CUM THE MANDAL LEVEL INCHARGE OFFICER, ASSIGNED FOR M/S SREESANNIDHl FOODS PUTHALAPATTU MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, 3.THE PVT. LTD ANDHRA PRADESH ...RESPONDENT(S); Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the and 3rd Respondents in imposing and insisting the Petitioner Company to procure the mango loads more than its capacity and action of the 2 and feasibility by issuing un authorised Arrival booking forms/booking tokens in the name of the Petitioners company and interfering into the processing function of the Petitioners plant as illegal, high handed, arbitrary and in violation of the provisions of Article 14,19(1 )(g) and Constitution of India and contrary to the guidelines issued by the 2 nd Respondent vide proceedings Proc.Rc. 07.06.2025and consequently direct the respondents to limit their interference to the extent of noting the details of the farmers for the purpose of providing subsidy as per the guidelines issued in proceedings vide Proc.Rc. No.DDH/Mango/2025 dated 07.06.2025and pass such lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Article 21 of the No.DDH/Mango/2025 dated Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to restrain the 3rd Respondents and their staff from interfering into the process of procurement of mangoes by entering in and around the petitioner company premises including issuance of Arrival booking forms/booking tokens pending the writ petition and/or pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.DIVYAA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2.GP FOR AGRICULTURE The Court made the following: V3L V THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:16763/2025 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2^'^ and 3'”'^ Respondents in imposing and insisting the Petitioner Company to proc ure the mango loads more than its capacity and action of the 2 and feasibility by issuing unauthorised Arrival booking forms/booking tokens in the name of the Petitioners company and interfering into the processing function of the Petitioners plant as illegal, high handed, arbitrary and in violation of the provisions of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the guidelines issued by the 2 Respondent vide proceedings Proc.Rc.No.ODH/Mango/2025 dated 07.06.2025 and consequently direct the respondents to limit their interference to the extent of noting the details of the farmers for the purpose of providing subsidy as per the guidelines issued in proceedings vide Proc.Rc.No.DDH/Mango/2025 dated 07.06.2025 and pass such other order or orders...” nd 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is a registered private limited company which has been engaged in food processing more particularly with regard to mangoes. While so, the respondent No.2 issued a circular dated 07.06.2025 to redress grievances of mango farmers of the district and to assure to provide minimum support price pursuant to the policy decision of the respondent. Accordingly, the 2 nd respondent issued a direction to the petitioner and other similarly situated food processing units within the district while processing the totapuri mangoes for food processing, they shall pay @ Rs. 12/- per kg to the farmers. Out of which, respondent No.1 will pay subsidy amount of Rs.4/- and the processor/ petitioner has to pay only Rs.8/- per Kg (Totapuri Mangoes). Whereas, the petitioner herein categorically stated the capacity of the petitioner’s unit to process the mangoes is only 60 tractors per day. Even though the petitioner specifically reported the same, but the respondents, more particularly respondent No.3 herein and his staff illegally issuing tokens more than the capacity of the petitioner processing unit and pressurizing the petitioner to procure the mangoes excess to their capacity. Hence, the writ petition. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for revenue furnished 4. written instructions dated 07.07.2025 issued by the Tahsildar, wherein, the relevant portion of the said instructions is extracted hereunder: “It is submitted that the petitioner company was issued tokens for mango farmers, but it was noticed that the company was not following guidelines and was misusing the issuance of tokens. It is submitted that local farmers complained to the District Collector about the company's practices, alleging that tokens were being issued unfairly and to Influential people and non local farmers and District Collector Chittoor has spoken with company people about the misuse of tokens and instructed to give 30 tokens to small and marginal farmers daily to do Justice to the local farmers of Chittoor District and company agreed to It and given arrival forms to the farmers and Department never crossed that number up to Saturday I.e. 05.07.2025. And no further tokens were issued from that day. It is submitted that, In order to maintain law and order, help local people, and stop the company's illegal practices, issued tokens to local small farmers and maintained queues outside of the company and allowed vehicles sequentially and controlled traffic in coordination with the police department. ” nd 5. On perusal of the written instructions, it is observed that the 2 respondent has specifically instructed to give only 30 tokens for 30 tractors per day for each unit. However, the petitioner and other unit holders shall procure from all the small and marginal farmers to do justice to the local farmers. Therefore, the respondent No.3 shall adhere to the instructions dated 07.07.2025. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsels and in 6. view of the written instructions dated 07.07.2025, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition can be disposed of, directing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 herein not to pressurize the petitioner to procure unsuitable and excess procurement to their capacity i.e., more than 60 tractors per day on the guise of subject circular dated 07.06.2025 issued by respondent No.2. Any action contrary to the observations as stated above, is nothing but infringing the rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Chapter 3, Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as 7. to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- N NAGAWIMA j assistant registrar i //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Special Chief Secretary Andhra Pradesh, A.P Secretariat, Velagapudi, Andhra Pradesh 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh 3. The Mandal Revenue Officer cum The Mandal Level Incharge Officer assigned for M/s Sree Sannidhi Foods Pvt. Ltd Puthalapattu Mandal Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh 4. One CC to M/s. Divya A, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. Two CCs to GP for Agriculture, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies Department of Agriculture, State of ssb HIGH COURT DATED:08/07/2025 ORDER WPNo. 16763 OF 2025 OF Sectfon Id DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS