Karnataka High Court Directs Govt. On Farmers’ Plea
While considering a PIL seeking operation of procurement centers across the State throughout the year, the Karnataka High Court has directed the State Government to establish at least one procurement center in each Taluka for 2 months beyond the procurement period.
The PIL filed before the Karnataka High Court sought a direction to the respondents to operate procurement centres across the State of Karnataka throughout the year, to enable farmers to sell their produce at the Minimum Support Price (MSP).
The Division Bench of Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria and Justice K. V. Aravind directed, “In view of the fact that crop harvesting now extends beyond the traditional harvesting seasons, and in order to ensure that farmers are adequately remunerated through the Minimum Support Price (MSP) mechanism and are not compelled to resort to distress sales through middlemen, the State Government shall establish at least one procurement center in each Taluka for a period of two months beyond the procurement period fixed by the Government of India.
Advocate Gautam Shreedhar Bharadwaj represented the Petitioner while CGC B. Pramod represented the Respondents.
Factual Background
The Petitioner society is stated to be actively engaged in various farmer-centric activities. It is the averment of the petitioner that farmers are facing severe hardship due to the non-operation of procurement centres throughout the year. It was contended that the procurement centres are functional only for a limited period each year, which, apart from causing inconvenience and hardship to farmers, results in their being compelled to sell their produce to middlemen or agents at rates substantially lower than the MSP. It is further submitted that the State Government undertakes direct procurement of food grains and distributes the same under various welfare schemes. It was further the petitioner’s case that there exists no statutory mandate or restriction that prohibits the operation of procurement centres throughout the year.
Reasoning
Considering the plea seeking a direction to operate procurement centers for the purchase of food grains in furtherance of the provisions of the National Food Security Act, 2013, the Bench noted that while the said Act mandates procurement of food grains at the MSP through designated procurement centers, the mechanism for establishing such centers, including their number and location, is left to the discretion of the State Government. The decision regarding the number of procurement centrers is a matter of policy, which may reasonably vary from State to State, District to District, and depending on the geographical and agricultural conditions prevalent in a given region.
“The determination of the number and duration of operation of procurement centers falls squarely within the domain of the executive, and as such, is a matter of policy. The scope of judicial review in such matters is limited and may be exercised only when the decision is shown to be arbitrary, unreasonable, or violative of constitutional provisions”, it said.
Highlighting the objectives underlying the procurement of food grains at the Minimum Support Price by the Government, the Bench held that the prayer seeking a direction to operate procurement centers throughout the year couldn’t be acceded to. However, the Bench noted that the contention of the petitioner that the procurement period of three months for each season is insufficient required due consideration. “Once it is undisputed that the harvesting periods have shifted, strict adherence to outdated seasonal norms for procurement defeats the very objective of the MSP regime. Considering that the primary aim of procurement at MSP is to ensure fair remuneration to farmers and to protect them from distress sales, a re-examination and reasonable relaxation of the procurement period is warranted”, it said.
“In the absence of concrete material demonstrating year-round availability of food grains, directing procurement centers to remain open throughout the year would serve no meaningful purpose. Nevertheless, limited interference to relax the procurement period is warranted on account of certain factual aspects brought on record. In view of the categorical stand of the State acknowledging changes in traditional harvesting seasons, the procurement period requires appropriate relaxation to suit the local, geographical, and climatic conditions”, it further added.
The Bench was of the view that, considering that the procurement under the MSP scheme is limited to seasonal food grains, and to ensure the effective achievement of the scheme’s objectives, it is imperative that a sufficient number of procurement centers be made available and remain accessible to the farmers.
The Bench thus passed the following directions:
- The Deputy Commissioner of the District shall ensure that a scientific study is undertaken to assess the nature of crops cultivated and the estimated quantity of food grains likely to be brought by farmers to the procurement centers, prior to determining the number and location of such centers/
- Upon commencement of procurement at MSP, if the existing procurement centers are found to be insufficient, the concerned Deputy Commissioner shall ensure that adequate additional procurement centers are established and made operational within the procurement period to meet the demand.
- However, depending on the geographical conditions and the quantity of food grains produced in a particular region, the State Government shall have the discretion to keep procurement centers open beyond the period prescribed hereinabove, as may be necessary to ensure that the objectives of the MSP scheme are effectively achieved.
Cause Title: Rait Sena Karnataka v. Union Of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: Writ Petition No.12751 OF 2021 (GM-RES-PIL)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocate Gautam Shreedhar Bharadwaj
Respondent: CGC B. Pramod, AGA Niloufer Akbar, Advocates Urmila Pullat, B.N. Jagadeesha
