Latest news with #KuldeepTiwari
Time of India
13 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
HC asks Haryana to re-examine groundwater extraction fee policy for hospitals, banquet halls
1 2 Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana high court has directed the Haryana govt and the Haryana Water Resources Authority (HWRA) to re-evaluate its policy on groundwater extraction fees with regard to hospitals, clinics, nursing homes, and banquet halls. The HC wants state authorities to re-examine fee categorisation to ensure parity with industrial users. The court also restrained state authorities from taking any coercive action against the petitioners (health care service provider institutions and banquet halls) until the review process is completed. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari has passed these orders while disposing of a batch of 27 petitions filed by M/s White Oak Motel and Restaurants and others challenging the state notification dated Sep 10, 2021, which excluded their establishments from being treated as "industries" under Schedule I for the purpose of groundwater-use classification. Petitioners submitted that they are owners of banquet halls/marriage gardens/clinics/nursing homes etc., wherethrough, they are imparting services to the public at large. Moreover, the construction of the respective institutions/establishments is already complete, and now the petitioners only require water extraction for running their respective institutions/establishments. The main dispute was about differential treatment of establishments categorised under "industry" versus "infrastructure" with regard to groundwater extraction fee policy outlined in Schedule IV. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Everybody Is Switching To This Enterprise Accounting Software [Take a Look] Accounting ERP Click Here Undo Industrial users drawing less than 10 cubic metres per day are exempt from paying any fee. However, such an exemption does not apply to infrastructure users, a classification that includes hospitals, clinics, and marriage banquets. According to petitioners, this policy was discriminatory and irrational since many of their establishments provide essential public services, and their operations were being unfairly burdened when compared to industrial units. During the hearing of the matter, the counsel representing HWRA submitted that the issue could be reconsidered, noting that the existing policy was based on central govt models and may be due for a review. After hearing all parties, the court directed the state and HWRA to re-examine Schedule IV within two months and assess whether the fee categorisation applicable to industries can be extended to infrastructure users. In its recently released order, the judge, however, refrained from examining the legality of the 2021 notification on the grounds of arbitrariness or bias.
Indian Express
27-04-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
HC questions Punjab dept's statutory authority to ban hybrid paddy seeds
Days after Punjab government banned the sale of hybrid paddy seeds (non-Basmati rice varieties), citing high prices and low milling efficiency, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has sought to know which is the statutory authority behind the decision that could impact preparations for the upcoming Kharif 2025 sowing season. A bench of Justice Kuldeep Tiwari asked the Punjab Government to submit details justifying the legal basis on which the April 7 order banning hybrid seeds was issued and the statutory force behind it. The bench specifically asked the Director of Department of Agriculture and Farmers' Welfare (DAFW, Respondent No. 2) to file an affidavit explaining whether 'he/she has any authority/subject jurisdiction to pass such order'. In case of a lack of jurisdiction, the official must also explain why the order was passed, especially when the sowing season for Kharif 2025 has been advanced to June 1 — necessitating the preparation of nurseries by May 1. The bench further warned that in case of non-compliance of the directive, the Director will have to personally appear before the court on May 2, the next date of hearing date. Listing the main case in the urgent category, the court also made it clear that no adjournments would be entertained. The directives came on petitions filed by several traders who have contended that the Punjab agriculture department order to ban sale of hybrid paddy was in violation of the their fundamental right to carry trade contained in Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution. The petitioners contended that 23 varieties were notified for Punjab and they held valid licenses to sell them. However, the government's order not only deprived farmers of the freedom to choose the seeds they want to grow, but also prevented license holders from bringing these seeds to the market. During the hearing, Senior Advocate Gurminder Singh, with Advocates Harish Mehla and Yashshvi A. Kumar, appeared for the petitioners while deputy Advocate General Pardeep Bajaj accepted notice on behalf of the Punjab government and Director, DAFW. Legal experts warn that Punjab's blanket ban might violate national laws. According to them, the Seed Act, 1966, and the Seed Control Order, 1983, empower seed companies to sell centrally notified seeds — including hybrid varieties — without arbitrary state-level bans. Since paddy nurseries are sown 25 days to one month before transplantation, and this time sowing has been advanced to June 1 in Punjab, farmers would require seeds before the beginning of May. Orders for such hybrid seeds are usually placed in advance. The Director, DAFW had issued the order contending that hybrid seeds result in a higher percentage of broken rice during milling — reducing the milling outturn ratio (OTR) below the Food Corporation of India's (FCI) prescribed standard of 67%. The order also cited high prices of hybrid seeds. Citing these two factors — economic losses for farmers and poor milling returns for rice millers — the state imposed the ban. However, the move sparked opposition from both farmers and agricultural experts. In Punjab, farmers have widely adopted hybrid paddy seeds for their significant advantages. Private seed companies such as Savannah, VNR, Corteva, and Bayer supply popular varieties like Sava 127, Sava 134, Sava 7501, 27P22, and VNR 203. Farmers argue that hybrids offer shorter growing periods, higher yields, and even save water compared to traditional varieties developed by Punjab Agricultural University (PAU). These hybrids mature faster and yield 5–6 quintals more per acre and farmers earn Rs 13,000 to Rs 14,000 more per acre, and such varities produce less stubble. During the 2024–25 Kharif marketing season, rice millers refused to accept hybrid paddy, citing lower milling efficiency. The hybrid varieties allegedly achieved only 60–63% milling outturn, falling short of FCI's 67% standard. Last year, the government struggled to persuade millers to accept hybrid paddy. To avoid a repeat, it has now banned the sale of hybrid seeds ahead of sowing. In 2019 too, a similar ban was imposed but later relaxed to allow centrally notified hybrids. However, the current ban does not specify if officially recommended hybrids are exempt. Experts disagree with the government's assessment. They argue that such varieties are notified only after several trials and meeting the standards of FCI and the notified varieties not only meet but several exceed the standards. They said that the milling inefficiency often stems from improper harvesting and outdated milling machinery, not from the hybrid seeds themselves. Also, hybrid rice is cultivated across the world for its high yield and water-saving advantages. 'Once a seed variety is notified by the Centre, it becomes legally approved for sale. State governments can regulate quality but cannot prohibit the sale of centrally approved seeds,' said Ajai Rana, chairman of the Federation of Seed Industry of India.
