Writ Petition (MD) No. 18119 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos. 13066 and 13067 of 2016. Case: National South Indian River Interlinking Agriculturist Association Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu and Ors.. High Court of Madras (India)

Case NumberWrit Petition (MD) No. 18119 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos. 13066 and 13067 of 2016
CounselFor Appellant: S. Muthukrishnan, Adv. and For Respondents: R. Muthukumarasamy, Advocate General asst. by L.P. Shanmugasundaram, Special Government Pleader
JudgesS. Nagamuthu and M.V. Muralidaran, JJ.
IssueConstitution of India - Article 14
Judgement DateApril 04, 2017
CourtHigh Court of Madras (India)

Order:

S. Nagamuthu, J.

  1. The weather became erratic. The monsoon failed. The rainfall was very poor. The dams and water bodies dried up. Mettur dam completely failed due to the water dispute with the Government of Karnataka. The crops withered away. The cattle in the agricultural farms died. This was between 2011 to 2014. In 2015, it was floods across the State of Tamil Nadu which drowned the crops. The farming community suffered irreparable loss. They were pushed into utter poverty. They could not repay the crop loan raised from the cooperative societies/banks and other financial institutions. But the societies/banks and other financial institutions did not stop taking legal action to recover the said loan outstanding. Unable to bear the loss and the pressure and harassment from the financial institutions, many farmers took the extreme step of committing suicide. Therefore, in an attempt to voice these grievances of the farmers, various agriculturists associations including the petitioner made demands to the Government, both at the Center and at the State, to extend their helping hands by granting relief to the farmers so as to liberate them from penury and to prevent further suicides. There were strikes and agitations by the farmers as their grievances were not heard.

  2. When things stood thus, in the year 2016, the general election for the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly was announced. The election was held during the month of May, 2016. Some of the major political parties who contested in the election gave assurances to the farmers that the crop loans raised by them would be waived by the new Government to be formed. After the election, the newly elected Government took charge on 23.05.2016. On the very same day, to fulfill the promise made in the election manifesto of the party which regained power, the Government, issued G.O. Ms. No. 50, Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection (CC1) Department dated 23.05.2016 granting waiver of outstanding crop loan for medium term (agriculture) loan and long term (farm sector) loan issued to "Small" and "Marginal Farmers" by the Cooperative Societies/Banks as on 31.03.2016.

  3. For the effective implementation of the said Government Order, the Government issued guidelines by way of G.O. Ms. No. 59, Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection (CC1) Department dated 28.06.2016. Thereafter, the Registrar of Cooperative Societies issued a Circular in Circular No. Na.Ka. No. 47/2006-07/T.1 dated 07.07.2006 issuing further guidelines to the cooperative societies/banks for the effective implementation of these two Government orders.

  4. In these Government orders, as we have already pointed out, the waiver of the outstanding crop loan - medium term (agriculture) loan and long term (farm sector) loan as on 31.03.2016 was given only in favour of small and marginal farmers and not for the other farmers. As per the above Government Orders, a marginal farmer is the one whose "land holding" is up to 2.5 acres and a small farmer is the one whose "land holding" is from 2.5 acres to 5 acres as recorded in the land holding register and loan register of the society/bank at the time of sanction of loan. Thus, the farmers who have got land holdings of more than 5 acres are not extended the benefit of this crop loan waiver.

  5. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the above Government orders on the ground of discrimination and arbitrariness as, according to him, it materially discriminates the farmers whose "land holding" exceeds five acres. The petitioner claims that the said benefit of the Government orders should have been extended to all farmers irrespective of the extent of their agricultural land holdings as on the date of sanction of loan.

  6. At the outset, let us have a look into the above stated two Government orders which read as follows:

    Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection (CC1) Department

    G.O.(Ms) No. 50 Dated 23.05.2016

    Order:

    Honourable Chief Minister has made a promise in the Election Manifesto for the General Elections to the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly - 2016 to the effect that the Crop Loan, Medium Term Loan and Long Term Loan payable by the small and marginal farmers to Cooperative Banks will be waived.

    2. In pursuance to the above, the Government examined the matter and accordingly order that the outstanding Crop Loan, Medium Term (Agriculture) Loan and Long Term (Farm Sector) Loan issued to the small and marginal farmers by the Cooperative Banks as on 31.03.2016 be waived.

    3. Necessary funds for this purpose will be provided to the Cooperative Banks by the Government. Detailed guidelines in this regard will be issued separately.

    4. This order issues with the concurrence of the Finance department vide its U.O. No. 1490/ACS(F)/P/16, dated 23.05.2016.

    (By order of the Governor)

    Shiv Das Meena
    Principal Secretary to Governments

    ***********************************

    "Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection (CC1) Department

    G.O.(Ms) No. 59 Dated 28.06.2016
    Read:

  7. G.O.(Ms) No. 50, Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 23.05.2016.

  8. From the Registrar of Cooperative Societies letter Rc. No. 36363/2016 ACS1 dated 9.6.2016 --------------

    Order:

    In the Government order first read above, orders have been issued for waiver of outstanding Crop Loan, Medium Term (Agriculture) Loan and Loan and Long Term (Farm Sector) Loan issued to the small and marginal farmers by the Cooperative Societies as on 31.3.2016. It was also ordered that the detailed guidelines in this regard will be issued separately.

  9. In the reference second read above, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies has propose for guidelines for waiver of Crop Loan, Medium Term (Agriculture) Loan and Long Term (Farm Sector) Loan payable by the small and marginal farmers to the Cooperative Societies for approval of the Government.

  10. The Government, after careful examination, accepts the proposal of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and accordingly, orders that the guidelines as detailed in the annexure to this order be followed scrupulously for implementation of the scheme.

  11. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies is requested to send a consolidated proposal to the Government for issuing necessary specific orders on quantification and reimbursement of waived amount at the earliest.

  12. This order issues with the concurrence of the Finance Department vide its U.O. No. 2062/ACS(F)/P/16, dated 28.06.2016.

    (By order of the Governor)
    Pradeep Yadav
    Principal Secretary to Governments"

  13. The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. S. Muthukrishnan would submit that the impugned Government orders discriminate the agriculturists by making an unreasonable classification as marginal farmers, small farmers and other farmers. The learned counsel would submit that the object of extending the benefit of the loan waiver, though not indicated in the Orders, obviously is to protect the welfare of the farming community who have suffered huge loss due to drought like situation between 2011 to 2014 and floods during the year 2015 and the other natural calamities. Since all the farmers have suffered equal loss and they stand in the same footing, they should have been treated alike and not differently. He would further submit that there is no rationale behind the classification of the farmers into three groups. There is no intelligible differentia taken note of by the Government. This classification, according to the learned counsel has no nexus to the object which is sought to be achieved by the said policy of the Government.

  14. But in the counter filed by the first respondent, it is stated that small and marginal farmers form a class by themselves and that the said classification would not amount to any discrimination. It is submitted by Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy, the learned Advocate General that these small and marginal farmers, though operating only on 44% of the land under cultivation in the nation, are the main producers of food crops and giving food security to the nation with limited access to technology, inputs, credit, capital and markets. The small and marginal farmers have higher productivity compared with large sized holdings and they are contributing high to the pool of...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT