TMI Blog2003 (11) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion Bench. - C.A. 3630 OF 2003 - - - Dated:- 17-11-2003 - S.B. SINHA, V. N. KHARE AND A.C. LAKSHMANAN, JJ. JUDGMENT Section 72 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 provides for rule making power. Sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 72 of the Act read as under : (3) Any rule under this Act may be made with retrospective effect and when such a rule is made the reasons for making the rule shall be specified in a statement to be laid before both Houses of the State Legislature. (4) Every rule made under this Act, shall, immediately after it is made be laid before each House of the State Legislature if it is in session and if it is not in session, in the session immediately following for a total period of fourteen days wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. and Others vs. The State of Haryana [(1979) 2 SCC 196], this court noticed that there are three different laying clauses which assure different forms depending on the degree of control which the Legislature may like to exercise, namely, - (i) Laying without further procedure, (ii) Laying subject to negative resolution, (iii) Laying subject to affirmative resolution. Upon considering a large number of Indian and English decisions, it was held : From the foregoing discussion, it inevitably follows that the Legislature never intended that non-compliance with the requirement of laying as envisaged by sub- section (6) of Section 3 of the Act should render the order void. Consequently non-laying of the aforesaid notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any rule, it plays a positive role and has full control over it, but even where the matter is merely placed before any House, its positive control over the executive makes even mere laying to play a very vital and forceful role which keeps a check over the State Government concerned. Even if submission for the appellants is accepted that mere placement before a House is only for information, even then such information, inherently in it makes the legislature to play an important role as aforesaid for keeping a check on the activity of the State Government. Such placement cannot be construed to be non est. No act of Parliament should be construed to be of having no purpose. As we have said, mere discussion and questioning the Ministry concern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ature. Only in the event the Legislature is not satisfied with the sufficiency or otherwise of the reasons assigned, it may direct that the same would operate prospectively. Sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 72 must be read in such a manner that both may be given effect to. Sub-section (3) deals with only a special situation, whereas sub-section (4) is general in nature. In the event, a negative resolution is adopted the Rules will cease to have the force of law. Difference between sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 72 lies in the fact that whereas in case the rule is given retrospectivity, the members of both the houses of the Legislature shall be apprised of the reasons therefor, whereas in case of the rule which is prospective in natu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, laying of the Rules before both the Houses was held to be subject to affirmative resolution. Interpreting the said provision, it was observed : ...Mere perusal of sub-section (2) shows that there has to be a positive act of approval by Parliament to the issuance of the notification before it can be held that Schedule I has been amended. Merely laying the notification before each House of Parliament is not sufficient compliance within the provisions of Section 16(2). There is of course no time-limit within which the Houses of Parliament are required to pass a resolution once the Central Government has sought approval as contemplated by sub-section (2), but in the present case the pleadings disclose that no such approval was in fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fulfilled. Furthermore, in the instant case, the respondents have not been criminally proceeded against. They have merely incurred a civil liability. Such a liability could be fastened on them irrespective of Rule 24 of the A.P. Excise (Arrack and Toddy Licenses General Conditions) Rules, 1969 inasmuch in terms of the conditions of licence as also the Act and the Rules framed thereunder, the licensees are required to carry on their business in liquor which would mean the liquor free from all types of adulteration. Such goods should be fit for human consumption and not hazardous to health. For the said purpose, it was not necessary for the State to strictly adhere to Rule 24 of the Rules inasmuch the right of an accused in terms of Arti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
