SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1959 Supreme(SC) 100

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
6th May, 1959.
B.P. SINHA, S. JAFER IMAM, J.L. KAPUR, A.K. SARKAR, K. SUBBA RAO AND M. HIDAYATULLAH JJ.
1. The Lord Krishna Sugar Mills Ltd. and another (In Petn. No. 9 of 59) and 2. Shiva Prasad Banarsi Das Sugar Mills and another (In Petn. No. 14 of 59) Petitioners
Versus
The Union of India and another. Respondents.
Petns. Nos. 9 and 14 of 1959.
Advocates appeared
Mr. A. V. Viswanatha Sastri, Senior Advocate, (Mr. G. C. Mathur, Advocate, with him), for the Petitioners (in Petn. No. 9 of 1959); Mr. M. C. Setalvad, Attorney-General for India and Mr. B. Sen, Senior Advocate (Mr. R. H. Dhebar, Advocate, with them), for Respondent No. 1 (in both the Petitions); Mr. M. C. Setalvad, Attorney-General for India and Mr. B. Sen, Senior Advocate (Mr. B. P. Maheshwari, Advocate, with them, for Respondent No. 2 (in Petition No. 9 of 1959); Mr. N. C. Chatterjee, Senior Advocate, (Mr. G. C. Mathur, Advocate, with him), for petitioners (in Petition No. 14 of 1959); Mr. B. Sen, Senior Advocate (Mr. B. P. Maheshwari, Advocate, with him), for Respondent No. 2 (in Petition No.14 of 1959).

Advocates:
A.V.VISHWANATHA SASTRI, B.P.MAHESHVARI, B.SEN, G.C.MATHUR, M.C.SETALVAD, N.C.CHATTERJI, R.H.Dhebar

Judgement

M. HIDAYATULLAH J. : Writ Petition No. 9 of 1959 has been filed by the Lord Krishna Sugar Mills, Ltd., Saharanpur and Shri Sushil Kumar, a Director of the said Mills. It was heard along with Writ Petition No, 14 of 1959, which has been filed by Shiva Prasad Banarsidas Sugar Mills, Bijnor through Seth Munnalal and also by him in his own name. These Mills are hereinafter referred to as the L. K. S. Mills and S. P. B. Mills, respectively. The petitions raise the same contentions, but in Writ Petition No. 14 of 1959, there is one more circumstance, which will be mentioned later. The petitions are directed against the Union of India and the Indian Sugar Mills Association (Export Agency Division) Calcutta. The petitioners challenge inter alia the constitutionality of the Sugar Export Promotion Act, 1958 (30 of 1958), which shall hereafter be referred to as the Act. They question also the legality of certain orders passed by the second respondent purporting to be under the Act.

2. Before describing how this matter came before the Court, it is convenient to give the scheme of the Act and to set out some of its provisions. On 27-6-1958, the President promulgated the Sugar Export Promotion Ordinance, 1958, which was repealed by and re-enacted as the Act on 16-9-1958. The Ordinance was in the same terms as the Act, and it is not necessary to refer to the Ordinance separately, more so because by S. 14 of the Act which repealed the Ordinance, anything done or any action taken under the Ordinance is deemed to have been done or taken under the Act, and the Act itself is deemed to have commenced on 27-6-1958,

3. Both the Ordinance and the Act were passed to provide for the export of sugar in the public interest and for the levy and collection in certain circumstances of an additional duty of excise on sugar produced in India. To achieve this objective, the Act authorizes the Central Government (as did the Ordinance previously) to specify an export agency to perform the functions mentioned in the Act, and the Central Government by a notification issued the same day, specified the Indian Sugar Mills Association (Export Agency Division) Calcutta, as the export agency.

4. The Act next provides that the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, fix the quantity of sugar to be exported during any period taking into the consideration

(a) the quantity of sugar available in the country;

(b) the quantity of sugar required for consumption in the country; and

(c) the necessity of exporting sugar with a view to earning foreign exchange in the public interest,

but, so as not to exceed 20 per cent, of the quantity to be produced in India in the season ending with the month of October falling within that year. The Central Government fixed 50,000 tons as the quantity to be exported up to 31-12-1958, later extended to 31-1-1959. This notification was also issued on 27-6-1958.

5. Section 5 of the Act enables the Central Government to apportion, by order in writing the quantity to be exported among owners" of factories, the word "factory" being confined to a factory where sugar is produced by the vacuum pan process. The term "owner" is defined to include transferees, and agents and managers under Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. The apportionment of the quantity of sugar to be exported is to be in proportion to the quantity of sugar produced or likely to be produced by the owners during the season referred to earlier. On the communication of the order to an owner, the quantity so apportioned is deemed to be the export quota for the factory of that owner.

6. Section 6 then provides that on demand by the export agency, every owner shall deliver to it from time to time, sugar produced in his factory in such quantities (not exceeding in the aggregate his export quota fixed for the factory or group of factories, as the case may be), of such grade, in such manner, within such time and at such place, as may be specified by t

























































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top