SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

S.VAIDYANATHAN,J. & P.T.ASHA, J. arr was only a single bottle that has been given to the consumers or a single consumer has been given the same bottle numerous times or they were given to different persons.  Therefore, the very basis on which the survey has been undertaken appears to be a mere lip service and efforts, much less earnest efforts, have not been taken to get the consumers’ feedback. In fact, sample reports which have been produced before us do not indicate from whom the survey has been done and whether the person from whom the survey has been done is an Aavin consumer or a non Aavin consumer.   Post on 27.07.2023 at 3.15 P.M. for further hearing. (S.V.N., J.)   (P.T.A., J.) 25.07.2023 arr   Review Application (W) No.89 of 2019 and  WMP.No.11831 of 2023 and W.P.No.16411 of 2023 and WMP.Nos.15781 and 15783 of 2023

by ·

Review Application (W) No.89 of 2019 and

WMP.No.11831 of 2023 and

W.P.No.16411 of 2023 and

WMP.Nos.15781 and 15783 of 2023

S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.

&

P.T.ASHA, J.

Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, a Status Report was filed by the Managing Director of Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers’ Federation Ltd. (Aavin).

  • A very perusal of the report clearly indicates that earnest efforts have not been undertaken by the Federation. From a reading of the tabular statement given in paragraph 7 of the report, it is seen that for the feedback parameter styled “Buying of Milk in Glass bottles in future”, the consumers’ feedback has been stated as 0% of the consumer will buy and 100% of the consumers will not buy.  However, in the last feedback parameter styled “How do you like to purchase Aavin Milk in Glass bottles?”, the consumers’ feedback has been stated as 62.5 % of the consumers is willing to buy through shops, 12.5% of the consumers prefers door delivery and there is no response from 25% of the consumers.  Further, for the feedback parameter titled “Reason for buying bottled milk”, 6.25% of the consumers has stated as “environmentfriendly”, 0% of the consumers has stated as “Easy handling”, 18.75% of the consumers has stated as “Good for health”, 62.5% of the consumers has stated as “Price high” and there is no response from 12.5% of the consumers.
  • When 100% of the consumers has opined that they will not buy milk in glass bottles in future, this Court is at loss to understand as to how 62.5% of the consumers has opined that they would like to buy Aavin milk in glass bottles through shops and 12.5% of the consumers has opined that they prefer glass bottles to be door delivered. That apart, it is also really surprising to note that none of the consumers are willing to buy milk in glass bottles. The report also does not clarify the area in which the study  has taken place.
  • J. Ravindran, learned Additional Advocate General (Liaisoning) had informed this Court that they would come back with results of sample survey. However, from the 1-page tabular column furnished to us as well from certain averments in the status report, it is clear that the survey conducted has covered only two Aavin Parlours (shops) in the Nilgiris District and four in Kanniyakumari District and the total number of bottles that are given for sale here clearly shows that the survey has not covered the majority of the existing Aavin consumers. It also clearly indicates the reluctance on the part of the Federation in implementing the suggestion given by this Court.  This Court is at a loss to understand as to why the Federation is unwilling to supply milk in glass bottles when liquor is sold in glass bottles by TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited).  Further sales through milk bottles were in vogue in the late 60’s and early 70’s.  Thus, it is crystal clear that the exercise that was directed to be conducted by this Court, has not been conducted in the way in which directions were issued. This is precisely the reason as to why we observed in paragraph 2, supra, that earnest effort has not been undertaken by the Federation.

6 Moreover, a perusal of the status report would also indicate that no details as to when the sample bottles were given to the consumers and whether it

    S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.

&

P.T.ASHA, J.

arr was only a single bottle that has been given to the consumers or a single consumer has been given the same bottle numerous times or they were given to different persons.  Therefore, the very basis on which the survey has been undertaken appears to be a mere lip service and efforts, much less earnest efforts, have not been taken to get the consumers’ feedback. In fact, sample reports which have been produced before us do not indicate from whom the survey has been done and whether the person from whom the survey has been done is an Aavin consumer or a non Aavin consumer.

Post on 27.07.2023 at 3.15 P.M. for further hearing.

(S.V.N., J.)   (P.T.A., J.) 25.07.2023

arr

  Review Application (W) No.89 of 2019 and  WMP.No.11831 of 2023 and W.P.No.16411 of 2023 and WMP.Nos.15781 and 15783 of 2023

You may also like...