Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1970 (11) TMI 109

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... odities Act 1955 (Act 10 of 1955) hereinafter called the act.. The validity of s. 5(2)(d) of the act itself has also been assailed. The Control Orders which were promulgated under s. 3(2) (d) of the Act were the following (i) The Rice (Southern Zone)Movement Control Order, 1957. (ii)The Southern States (Regulation of Exports of Rice) Order, 1964; and (iii)The Andhra Pradesh Rice and Paddy (Restriction of Movement) Order, 1965. In the a peals the appellants had moved the High Court of Andhra Pradesh under Art. 226 of the Constitution. There the petitioner;, were dealers in rice and rice products such as puffed, parched and beaten rice (beaten rice is known as powa' while, parched and puffed rice is known as Murmura'). Some .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ra Pra- desh, Kerala, Madras, Mysore and Pondicherry which has been called the Southern Zone. According to cl. 3(1) no person can export or attempt to export or abet the export of rice from any place within the Southern Zone except under and in accordance with a permit issued by the State Government concerned or any officer authorised in this behalf by that Government subject to the condition that such export shall be regulated in accordance with the export quotas fixed by the Central Government. Now this control order made a division into Southern Zone or regions in the matter of export of rice. By the Control Order of 1964 the Southern Zone or regions were further divided into four specified areas i.e., States of Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, M .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... osed unreasonable res- trictions on the right of the petitioners to carry on trade as arbitrary powers had been conferred in the matter of issuing or withholding permits and there were no provi- sions for appeal or revision against refusal to grant a permit. Art. 301 in Part XIII of the Constituion declares that subject to the other provisions of this Part trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the territory of India shall be tree. Under Art. 302 Parliament may by law impose such restrictions on freedom of trade. commerce or intercourse between one State and another or within any part of the territory of India as may be required inthe public interest. Article 303 reads :- (1) Notwithstanding anything in article 302, neither Parli .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e there is complete absence of pleading in the writ petition filed before us. The High Court adverted to the matter but we have not been shown that any proper or firm foundation was laid in the writ petitions before the High Court on the question of preference or discrimination within Art. 303(1).. No argument, therefore, can be entertained on these matters. We are unable to see the necessity of reciting the requisite opinion within s. 3 (1) of the Act in the Control Orders. It is implicit in the recital in the Control Orders that they were being made under s. 3 of the Act that the Central Government had formed the requisite opinion within sub-s. (1) of that section. This disposes of the first four contentions. As regards the 5th point i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... permit is to be granted either by the State Government or by responsible officers of the rank of the District Collector or the Deputy Commissioner of Civil Supplies. Indeed, Mrs. Pappu quite properly agreed that if the State Government alone had the power to issue the permits the challenge on the ground of unreasonableness of the restrictions-would not be available. We consider that there is no bar to any of the aggrieved parties approaching the State Government by means of a representation for a final decision even if the matter has been dealt with by the District Collector or the Deputy Commissioner of Civil Sup-plies in the first instance and the permit has been refused or wrongly withheld by these officers. In these circumstances the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates