Case Note & Summary
The appellants, M/s Askins Biofuels Private Limited and M/s Shri Bharmanandasagar Jaggery Industries, filed a writ appeal against the order of a learned Single Judge dismissing their writ petition. The writ petition sought to quash the order dated 25.07.2022 passed by the 4th respondent, the Commissioner for Cane Development and Director of Sugar, Government of Karnataka, which refused to grant a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for establishing a sugar mill. The appellants had applied for NOC under the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966. The Commissioner refused the NOC on the ground that the existing crushing capacity in the region was sufficient and that granting a new NOC would lead to shortage of cane for existing mills. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, holding that the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 does not confer a right to obtain an NOC and that the Commissioner's decision was based on valid policy considerations. In the intra-court appeal, the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, upheld the Single Judge's order. The court held that the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 does not create any legal right in favor of the appellants to obtain an NOC. The Commissioner has discretion to grant or refuse NOC based on factors such as existing crushing capacity, cane availability, and policy of the government. The court further held that the writ court cannot interfere with such administrative decisions unless they are arbitrary or perverse. The appeal was dismissed, and the order of the learned Single Judge was confirmed.
Headnote
A) Sugarcane Law - No Objection Certificate - Right to NOC - Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 - The court considered whether the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 confers a right on a person to obtain a No Objection Certificate for establishing a sugar mill. Held that the Order does not create any such right; the Commissioner has discretion to grant or refuse NOC based on factors like existing crushing capacity and cane availability. (Paras 1-5) B) Writ Jurisdiction - Judicial Review - Administrative Discretion - The court examined the scope of judicial review of the Commissioner's decision refusing NOC. Held that the writ court cannot substitute its own decision for that of the expert authority unless the decision is arbitrary or perverse. (Paras 6-10) C) Sugar Industry - Establishment of Sugar Mill - Policy Considerations - The court noted that the refusal of NOC was based on the policy of not increasing crushing capacity in the region due to inadequate cane supply. Held that such policy decisions are within the domain of the executive and not subject to interference by the court. (Paras 11-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petitioners have a legal right to obtain a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Commissioner for Cane Development and Director of Sugar for establishing a sugar mill under the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966.
Final Decision
The writ appeal is dismissed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 06.01.2023 in W.P. No. 102856/2022 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Sugarcane (Control) Order
- 1966
- No Objection Certificate
- Sugar mill establishment
- Writ jurisdiction
- Intra-court appeal
