Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31923 (BOM)

MUNJAJI SAMBHAJI TIDKE v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS

PIL/61/2022 · 2025-02-12

Shri Mangesh S Patil, Shri Prafulla S Khubalkar

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

68 PIL NO. 56 OF 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 56 OF 2022 GORKHNATH RAVANRAO PATIL VERSUS UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS … WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 61 OF 2022 MUNJAJI SAMBHAJI TIDKE VERSUS UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS … Advocate for the Petitioners in both PIL : Mr. Ghatol Patil Shahaji B. DSGI for Respondent No. 1 in both PIL : Mr. A. G. Talhar … CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR , JJ. DATE : 12.02.2025 PER COURT : . The petitioners are taking exception to the Government Resolution dated 06.01.2022 by posing that they have been espousing a public cause. 2. By that Government Resolution dated 06.01.2022, in order to contribute to the welfare scheme for the sugarcane cutting laborers, it has been resolved that, without adversely affecting the F.R.P. to be paid to the farmers, every sugar factory should contribute to the fund at the rate of Rs. 10/- per metric ton. 1/2 2025:BHC-AUG:4471-DB 68 PIL NO. 56 OF 2022 3. Some sugar factories have already filed writ petitions taking exception to the very Government Resolution. 4 On our query, the learned advocate for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners being farmers and shareholders of the co-operative sugar factory, such contribution by the factories would adversely affect their functioning and affect the farmers who are to get the F.R.P.. 5. Once it is abundantly clear from the stipulation in the preface to the Government Resolution that such contribution has to be made without adversely affecting the F.R.P., in our considered view, the farmers should not have any grievance. 6. This being the only reason being pointed out, we are not inclined to entertain these PILs. The PIL petitions are disposed of. (PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.) (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) jhs/ 2/2