UNKNOWN v. M/s.Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Sugar Mills

W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batch M/s.Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Sugar Mills, Udumbiyam, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur District ... RespondentsPRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the entire records relating to the impugned GO.(Ms).No.153 Agriculture (S1) Department dated 25.06.2018 passed by the first respondent and to quash the same. For Petitioner: Mr.C.PrakasamFor RespondentsFor R1 & 2 : Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, Special Government PleaderFor R3 & 4: Mr.S.Ravikumar, Additional Government Pleader COMMON ORDERThese writ petitions have been filed challenging the orders of the respondents thereby ordered to include the petitioners with other firkas by delimitation.2.The petitioners in all these writ petitions are Associations and sugarcane cultivators are its members. As per the Government Orders, firkas were allotted to each petitioner to supply sugarcanes with the sugar mills in Tamilnadu. The members of the petitioners are assured 2/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchof prompt payment for sugarcane supply to the respective sugar mills. So far no complaints from the members of the petitioners with regard to the distance between the field and the mill as the cost of transport are borne out by their respective mills. While being so, their firkas were modified and certain areas were included in some other firka and allotted to private sugar mills. Therefore, a batch of writ petitions were filed challenging the change over the firka and the same were allowed and accordingly, the petitioners can choose any sugar mill as their freewill. It was challenged by the private sugar mills by way of appeal and the same was also dismissed. 2.1While being so, several orders had been passed with regard to demarcating the cane areas from the cooperative sugar mills and the same were handed over to the private sugar mills. Therefore all the petitioners had challenged by way of writ petitions and the same were allowed by this Court. Aggrieved by the same, writ appeals were filed. Finally, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court dismissed the writ appeals and issued direction directing the Government of Tamilnadu to pass appropriate orders including two of the representatives of cane 3/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchgrowers in the area delimitation committee and the area delimitation committee shall confine its consideration relating to demarcation in respect of new sugar mills and sugar mills in private sector while the Director of Sugar cum Commissioner shall exercise its power relating to demarcation of areas between existing sugar mills in Cooperative and Public Sector as directed in the Government Order in GO.(Ms) No.217 dated 18.08.1997. 2.2In pursuant to the directions issued by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, now orders impugned in these writ petitions have been passed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed writ petitions on the ground that they have not been heard and their representatives were not heard and as such, it is violation of principles of natural justice. The orders impugned in these writ petitions are not in consonance with the directions issued in the batch of writ appeals by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in WA.No.401 of 1998 and batch, etc. The petitioners were not served with minutes of the area delimitation committee meeting dated 19.01.2018 which forms the basis of the orders impugned in these writ petitions. Prior to passing the impugned orders, 4/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchthe area delimitation committee meeting was done in a clandestine manner without hearing the members of the petitioners association. The respondents failed to see that this Court declared the areas allotted to various sugar mills as freewill area insofar as the members of the Cooperative Sugar Mills are concerned till the area delimitation committee and the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane passes orders in accordance with the directions issued by this Court. As a result, the members of the petitioners association had the freewill to sell the sugar cane to either cooperative society or to the private mills. Majority of the farmers had supplied the sugar cane to their respective cooperative society mills. It is relevant to extract the order passed by this Court in the above said batch of writ petitions as follows:(a) The Commissioner of Sugar and Cane Commissioner is directed to afford sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and other Sugarcane growers before allotting sugarcane command areas to private Sugar Mills.(b) The Commissioner of Sugar and Cane is also directed to hear the Cooperative Sugar Mills.(c) The Area Delimitation Committee is directed to consider the grievance of sugarcane growers in respect of 5/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchtheir being members / shareholders and distance and also such other relevant aspects.(d) Till the Area Delimitation Committee and the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane passes order, the areas allotted to various Sugar Mills shall remain as free will area in so far as the members of Cooperative Sugar Mills.(e) After affording opportunities to the members of various cooperative Societies and other sugarcane growers and also Cooperative Sugar Mills, the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane and Area Delimitation Committee shall consider the matter within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order."3.On perusal of the counter filed by the Commissioner of Sugar, Chennai and on hearing the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on either side, revealed that there are 40 sugar mills in Tamilnadu, of which 16 are in Cooperative Sector, 2 in Public Sector and 20 in the Private Sector. The total crushing capacity of sugar mills in Tamilnadu is 1,37,650 tonnes per day. Already the order of demarcation were challenged and this Court allowed the writ petitions and issued the above directions. Aggrieved by the same, the private mills filed writ appeals and the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court dismissed the writ 6/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchappeals with directions. As directed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, the area allotted to the sugar mills as follows:a) Area allotted to Newly established M/s.Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Sugars Pvt.Ltd(DSSL) Udumbiyam, Perambalur District vide G.O.(Ms) No.194, Agriculture(S1) Department, dated 23.05.2008SNo.Name of the District & FirkaArea carved out fromDistance from Sugar Mills (in KM)DSSLPSMSalem CSM1Pasumbalur2Venkalam(Part)3Kurumbalur4Chettikulam5Kolakkanatham6Gangavalli7Veeraganur8ThalaivasalPerambalur Sugar Mills(PSM)26.515.86.036.027.422.049.037.549.938.317.127.06.546.721.346.99Thuraiyur10Uppliyapuram11Koppampatti12Eragudi13Sangattupatti14Thatheingarpet15Vennandur16Mangalapuram17Namagiripettai18Rasipuram19MullikurichiSalem Cooperative Sugar Mills (Salem CSM)58.8-63.174.5-61.654.0-65.571.7-50.060.7-72.780.8-41.4110.9-57.064.1-77.082.3-57.3110.2-47.948.9-79.17/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchb) Area allotted to Newly established M/s.Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd., (BASL) Kolundampattu, Tiruvannamalai District vide G.O.(Ms) No.202, Agriculture(S1) Department, dated 03.06.2008SNo.Name of the District & FirkaArea carved out fromDistance from Sugar Mills (in KM)BASLTCSMK-I CSMS Siva CSM1Singarapet2Kallavi3Chengam4Pudupalayam5Eraiyur6Pachai7Melpallipattu8Thandarampattu(Part)Tirupattur Co-operative Sugar Mills (TCSM)38.848.4--62.556.7--18.069.7--24.181.6--11.582.5--10.986.3--25.667.1--12.389.7--SNo.Name of the District & FirkaArea carved out fromDistance from Sugar Mills (in KM)9Thandarampattu (Part)10Thanipadi(Part)11Thatchampattu(Part)12Thanipadi (Part)13Kalrayan Hills14TheerthamalaiKallakurichi-ICo-operative Sugar Mills (K-I CSM)Subramaniya Siva Cooperative Sugar Mills (S SivaCSM)12.3-14.4-25.3-20.4-32.9-16.3-25.3--62.0107.3--69.453.7--27.9c) Area allotted to Newly established M/s.Dharani Sugars and Chemicals 8/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchLtd., (DSCL) Sankarapuram, Villupuram District vide GO.(Ms) No.514, Agriculture (S1) Department dated 11.12.2007SNoName of the District & FirkaArea carved out fromDistance from Sugar Mills (in KM)DSCLTASLCCSMK-ICSMK-IICSM1Eraiyur (part)2NagalurThiru Arooran Sugar Ltd.,A.ChitoorTASL26.742.0---15.526.6---3Eraiyur(Part)4Tirupalapandal(part)ChengalrayanCooperativeSugar MillsCCSM26.7-28.7--26.0-31.5--5Tirupalapandal(part)6RishivandiyamKallakurichi-I Cooperative Sugar Mills (K-I CSM)26.0--30.2-9.0--42.2-7ThiyagathuragamKallakurichi II Cooperative Sugar Mills(K-II CSM)4.6---27.04.According to the respondents, the 49th Area Delimitation Committee had been conducted on 19.01.2018. While demarcation of areas, sufficient opportunities have been given to the sugar cane farmers of that area and sugar mills concerned through public hearing. 9/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batch5.Sugarcane and sugar are essential commodities under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and in exercise of the power conferred under Section 3 of the Act. The Central Government has passed sugar cane (Control) Order 1966. Clause 6 of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 deals with powers relating to Regulation, Distribution and Movement of Sugar cane. In exercise of power conferred by the clause 11 of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966, the Central Government has delegated the powers conferred on it in clauses 6, 7, 8, 9 to the State Government by its proceedings dated 16.07.1966. Accordingly, State Government has power to reserve any area where sugarcane is grown for a factory having regard to the crushing capacity of the factory, availability of sugar cane in the reserved area and the need for production of sugar. As per the Government order in GO.Ms.No.468 Industries (MIC-1) Department dated 06.12.1993 ordered to constitute the area delimitation committee to recommend area of operation of each sugar mills for getting sugar cane from the growers. Once again, as per GO.Ms.No.217 Industries (MIC1) Department dated 18.08.1997, the powers related to demarcation of areas between the existing sugar mills in Cooperative and Public Sector Sugar Mill shall be restored to the Director 10/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchof Sugarcane Commissioner as per the provisions of the Sugarcane (Control) order 1966. 6.As per the GO.Ms.no.362 Agriculture (Sugarcane) Department dated 26.11.2006 stipulated certain guidelines for setting up new sugar mills in Tamilnadu and issued guidelines. Accordingly, in the year 2007-2008, the Government have issued orders for allotment of cane areas to 9 integrated sugar complexes. It was challenged before this Court and all the petitions were allowed and quashed the impugned orders of demarcation and allotment of areas to various private sugar mills. Further ordered that till the area delimitation committee and the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane passes the order, the areas allotted to various sugar mills shall remain as freewill area insofar as the members of Cooperative Sugarmills. Aggrieved by the same, the private mills challenged the same by way of writ appeals. Accordingly, now impugned orders have been passed.7.The specific contention raised in all these writ petitions is that the petitioners were not given opportunity of hearing and it is 11/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchviolation of principles of natural justice. That apart, majority of farmers comprising 80% represented from their firka that not to supply to private sugar mills. Therefore without giving opportunity of hearing to all farmers and placing reliance only on the distance of the concerned firka from the sugar mills and passed orders. In terms of GO.Ms.No.217 Industries (MIC1) Department dated 18.08.1997, it is the area delimitation Commission that would consider proceedings concerning demarcation in respect of new sugar mills and sugar mills private sector as opposed to the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane. That apart, public meeting was conducted in the year 2013. After period of five years, the impugned orders came to be passed. Therefore, without ascertaining the position at the time of passing impugned orders, all the impugned orders came to be passed. Therefore, non considering the farmers' views and wishes, violates their fundamental rights as envisaged under Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution of India. 8.In view of the above, the impugned orders cannot be sustained and the same are liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the impugned orders are quashed and all the writ petitions are allowed. 12/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchHowever, Commissioner of Sugar and Cane Commissioner is at liberty to pass fresh order in view of the direction issued by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in WA.No.401 of 1998 and batch, etc. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 12.04.2024Neutral Citation:Yes/No(2/2)Index: Yes/NolokG.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.lokTo1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture(S1) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 0092.The Commissioner of Sugar and Cane, Periyar Building, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-353.The Administrator, Perambalur Sugar Mills Ltd., Eraiyur, Perambalur District4.The Managing Director, M/s.Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Sugar Mills, Udumbiyam, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur DistrictW.P.Nos.25018, 24122, 25238, 25287, 25289, 25437,13/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batch25443, 26215, 26618, 27804, 28740, 30341 of 2018 & 964 of 201912.04.2024(2/2)14/14

W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batch M/s.Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Sugar Mills, Udumbiyam, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur District ... RespondentsPRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the entire records relating to the impugned GO.(Ms).No.153 Agriculture (S1) Department dated 25.06.2018 passed by the first respondent and to quash the same. For Petitioner: Mr.C.PrakasamFor RespondentsFor R1 & 2 : Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, Special Government PleaderFor R3 & 4: Mr.S.Ravikumar, Additional Government Pleader COMMON ORDERThese writ petitions have been filed challenging the orders of the respondents thereby ordered to include the petitioners with other firkas by delimitation.2.The petitioners in all these writ petitions are Associations and sugarcane cultivators are its members. As per the Government Orders, firkas were allotted to each petitioner to supply sugarcanes with the sugar mills in Tamilnadu. The members of the petitioners are assured 2/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchof prompt payment for sugarcane supply to the respective sugar mills. So far no complaints from the members of the petitioners with regard to the distance between the field and the mill as the cost of transport are borne out by their respective mills. While being so, their firkas were modified and certain areas were included in some other firka and allotted to private sugar mills. Therefore, a batch of writ petitions were filed challenging the change over the firka and the same were allowed and accordingly, the petitioners can choose any sugar mill as their freewill. It was challenged by the private sugar mills by way of appeal and the same was also dismissed. 2.1While being so, several orders had been passed with regard to demarcating the cane areas from the cooperative sugar mills and the same were handed over to the private sugar mills. Therefore all the petitioners had challenged by way of writ petitions and the same were allowed by this Court. Aggrieved by the same, writ appeals were filed. Finally, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court dismissed the writ appeals and issued direction directing the Government of Tamilnadu to pass appropriate orders including two of the representatives of cane 3/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchgrowers in the area delimitation committee and the area delimitation committee shall confine its consideration relating to demarcation in respect of new sugar mills and sugar mills in private sector while the Director of Sugar cum Commissioner shall exercise its power relating to demarcation of areas between existing sugar mills in Cooperative and Public Sector as directed in the Government Order in GO.(Ms) No.217 dated 18.08.1997. 2.2In pursuant to the directions issued by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, now orders impugned in these writ petitions have been passed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed writ petitions on the ground that they have not been heard and their representatives were not heard and as such, it is violation of principles of natural justice. The orders impugned in these writ petitions are not in consonance with the directions issued in the batch of writ appeals by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in WA.No.401 of 1998 and batch, etc. The petitioners were not served with minutes of the area delimitation committee meeting dated 19.01.2018 which forms the basis of the orders impugned in these writ petitions. Prior to passing the impugned orders, 4/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchthe area delimitation committee meeting was done in a clandestine manner without hearing the members of the petitioners association. The respondents failed to see that this Court declared the areas allotted to various sugar mills as freewill area insofar as the members of the Cooperative Sugar Mills are concerned till the area delimitation committee and the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane passes orders in accordance with the directions issued by this Court. As a result, the members of the petitioners association had the freewill to sell the sugar cane to either cooperative society or to the private mills. Majority of the farmers had supplied the sugar cane to their respective cooperative society mills. It is relevant to extract the order passed by this Court in the above said batch of writ petitions as follows:(a) The Commissioner of Sugar and Cane Commissioner is directed to afford sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and other Sugarcane growers before allotting sugarcane command areas to private Sugar Mills.(b) The Commissioner of Sugar and Cane is also directed to hear the Cooperative Sugar Mills.(c) The Area Delimitation Committee is directed to consider the grievance of sugarcane growers in respect of 5/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchtheir being members / shareholders and distance and also such other relevant aspects.(d) Till the Area Delimitation Committee and the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane passes order, the areas allotted to various Sugar Mills shall remain as free will area in so far as the members of Cooperative Sugar Mills.(e) After affording opportunities to the members of various cooperative Societies and other sugarcane growers and also Cooperative Sugar Mills, the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane and Area Delimitation Committee shall consider the matter within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order."3.On perusal of the counter filed by the Commissioner of Sugar, Chennai and on hearing the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on either side, revealed that there are 40 sugar mills in Tamilnadu, of which 16 are in Cooperative Sector, 2 in Public Sector and 20 in the Private Sector. The total crushing capacity of sugar mills in Tamilnadu is 1,37,650 tonnes per day. Already the order of demarcation were challenged and this Court allowed the writ petitions and issued the above directions. Aggrieved by the same, the private mills filed writ appeals and the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court dismissed the writ 6/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchappeals with directions. As directed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, the area allotted to the sugar mills as follows:a) Area allotted to Newly established M/s.Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Sugars Pvt.Ltd(DSSL) Udumbiyam, Perambalur District vide G.O.(Ms) No.194, Agriculture(S1) Department, dated 23.05.2008SNo.Name of the District & FirkaArea carved out fromDistance from Sugar Mills (in KM)DSSLPSMSalem CSM1Pasumbalur2Venkalam(Part)3Kurumbalur4Chettikulam5Kolakkanatham6Gangavalli7Veeraganur8ThalaivasalPerambalur Sugar Mills(PSM)26.515.86.036.027.422.049.037.549.938.317.127.06.546.721.346.99Thuraiyur10Uppliyapuram11Koppampatti12Eragudi13Sangattupatti14Thatheingarpet15Vennandur16Mangalapuram17Namagiripettai18Rasipuram19MullikurichiSalem Cooperative Sugar Mills (Salem CSM)58.8-63.174.5-61.654.0-65.571.7-50.060.7-72.780.8-41.4110.9-57.064.1-77.082.3-57.3110.2-47.948.9-79.17/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchb) Area allotted to Newly established M/s.Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd., (BASL) Kolundampattu, Tiruvannamalai District vide G.O.(Ms) No.202, Agriculture(S1) Department, dated 03.06.2008SNo.Name of the District & FirkaArea carved out fromDistance from Sugar Mills (in KM)BASLTCSMK-I CSMS Siva CSM1Singarapet2Kallavi3Chengam4Pudupalayam5Eraiyur6Pachai7Melpallipattu8Thandarampattu(Part)Tirupattur Co-operative Sugar Mills (TCSM)38.848.4--62.556.7--18.069.7--24.181.6--11.582.5--10.986.3--25.667.1--12.389.7--SNo.Name of the District & FirkaArea carved out fromDistance from Sugar Mills (in KM)9Thandarampattu (Part)10Thanipadi(Part)11Thatchampattu(Part)12Thanipadi (Part)13Kalrayan Hills14TheerthamalaiKallakurichi-ICo-operative Sugar Mills (K-I CSM)Subramaniya Siva Cooperative Sugar Mills (S SivaCSM)12.3-14.4-25.3-20.4-32.9-16.3-25.3--62.0107.3--69.453.7--27.9c) Area allotted to Newly established M/s.Dharani Sugars and Chemicals 8/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchLtd., (DSCL) Sankarapuram, Villupuram District vide GO.(Ms) No.514, Agriculture (S1) Department dated 11.12.2007SNoName of the District & FirkaArea carved out fromDistance from Sugar Mills (in KM)DSCLTASLCCSMK-ICSMK-IICSM1Eraiyur (part)2NagalurThiru Arooran Sugar Ltd.,A.ChitoorTASL26.742.0---15.526.6---3Eraiyur(Part)4Tirupalapandal(part)ChengalrayanCooperativeSugar MillsCCSM26.7-28.7--26.0-31.5--5Tirupalapandal(part)6RishivandiyamKallakurichi-I Cooperative Sugar Mills (K-I CSM)26.0--30.2-9.0--42.2-7ThiyagathuragamKallakurichi II Cooperative Sugar Mills(K-II CSM)4.6---27.04.According to the respondents, the 49th Area Delimitation Committee had been conducted on 19.01.2018. While demarcation of areas, sufficient opportunities have been given to the sugar cane farmers of that area and sugar mills concerned through public hearing. 9/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batch5.Sugarcane and sugar are essential commodities under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and in exercise of the power conferred under Section 3 of the Act. The Central Government has passed sugar cane (Control) Order 1966. Clause 6 of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 deals with powers relating to Regulation, Distribution and Movement of Sugar cane. In exercise of power conferred by the clause 11 of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966, the Central Government has delegated the powers conferred on it in clauses 6, 7, 8, 9 to the State Government by its proceedings dated 16.07.1966. Accordingly, State Government has power to reserve any area where sugarcane is grown for a factory having regard to the crushing capacity of the factory, availability of sugar cane in the reserved area and the need for production of sugar. As per the Government order in GO.Ms.No.468 Industries (MIC-1) Department dated 06.12.1993 ordered to constitute the area delimitation committee to recommend area of operation of each sugar mills for getting sugar cane from the growers. Once again, as per GO.Ms.No.217 Industries (MIC1) Department dated 18.08.1997, the powers related to demarcation of areas between the existing sugar mills in Cooperative and Public Sector Sugar Mill shall be restored to the Director 10/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchof Sugarcane Commissioner as per the provisions of the Sugarcane (Control) order 1966. 6.As per the GO.Ms.no.362 Agriculture (Sugarcane) Department dated 26.11.2006 stipulated certain guidelines for setting up new sugar mills in Tamilnadu and issued guidelines. Accordingly, in the year 2007-2008, the Government have issued orders for allotment of cane areas to 9 integrated sugar complexes. It was challenged before this Court and all the petitions were allowed and quashed the impugned orders of demarcation and allotment of areas to various private sugar mills. Further ordered that till the area delimitation committee and the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane passes the order, the areas allotted to various sugar mills shall remain as freewill area insofar as the members of Cooperative Sugarmills. Aggrieved by the same, the private mills challenged the same by way of writ appeals. Accordingly, now impugned orders have been passed.7.The specific contention raised in all these writ petitions is that the petitioners were not given opportunity of hearing and it is 11/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchviolation of principles of natural justice. That apart, majority of farmers comprising 80% represented from their firka that not to supply to private sugar mills. Therefore without giving opportunity of hearing to all farmers and placing reliance only on the distance of the concerned firka from the sugar mills and passed orders. In terms of GO.Ms.No.217 Industries (MIC1) Department dated 18.08.1997, it is the area delimitation Commission that would consider proceedings concerning demarcation in respect of new sugar mills and sugar mills private sector as opposed to the Commissioner of Sugar and Cane. That apart, public meeting was conducted in the year 2013. After period of five years, the impugned orders came to be passed. Therefore, without ascertaining the position at the time of passing impugned orders, all the impugned orders came to be passed. Therefore, non considering the farmers' views and wishes, violates their fundamental rights as envisaged under Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution of India. 8.In view of the above, the impugned orders cannot be sustained and the same are liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the impugned orders are quashed and all the writ petitions are allowed. 12/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batchHowever, Commissioner of Sugar and Cane Commissioner is at liberty to pass fresh order in view of the direction issued by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in WA.No.401 of 1998 and batch, etc. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 12.04.2024Neutral Citation:Yes/No(2/2)Index: Yes/NolokG.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.lokTo1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture(S1) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 0092.The Commissioner of Sugar and Cane, Periyar Building, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-353.The Administrator, Perambalur Sugar Mills Ltd., Eraiyur, Perambalur District4.The Managing Director, M/s.Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Sugar Mills, Udumbiyam, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur DistrictW.P.Nos.25018, 24122, 25238, 25287, 25289, 25437,13/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.25018 of 2018, etc batch25443, 26215, 26618, 27804, 28740, 30341 of 2018 & 964 of 201912.04.2024(2/2)14/14