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

1958 Supreme(SC) 168

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
11th December, 1958.
S.R. DAS, C.J.I., S.K. DAS, P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K.N. WANCHOO, AND M. HIDAYATULLAH, JJ.
P.V. Sivarajan, Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India and another, Respondents.
Petition No. 121 of 1958.
Advocates Appeared
M/s. G. B. Pai and Sardar Bahadur, Advocates, for Petitioner; Mr. M. C. Setalvad, Attorney-General for India and Mr. B. Sen, Senior Advocate, (Mr. T. M. Sen, Advocate, with them), for Respondents.

Advocates:
B.SEN, G.B.PAI, M.C.SETALVAD, SARDAR BAHADUR SAHARYA, T.M.SEN

Judgment

P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, J. : The petitioner has been doing business as an exporter of coir products to foreign countries for the last twenty years. On July 4, 1958, he applied to respondent 2, the Chairman, Coir Board, Ernakulam, requesting that he should be registered as an established exporter. This application was accompanied by an income-tax clearance certificate and attested copies of bills of lading. Respondent 2 declined to register the petitioner on the ground that his application was defective inasmuch as the requisite certificate regarding his financial status had not been produced and no evidence had been given to show that he had exported the minimum quantity required (500 Cwts.). The petitioner was told that unless he complied with the requirements asked for within seven days his application would be rejected without further notice. The petitioner found that he could not comply with the directions issued by respondent 2 and so it became impossible for the petitioner to get registration and licence applied for by him. That is why he filed the present petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution and prayed for the issue of a writ or order in the nature of mandamus to direct the second respondent to grant the petitioner registration and licence as applied for by him and to prohibit or restrain the said respondent from acting on, or implementing, the rules issued under the Coir Industry Act 1953 by issue of a writ of certiorari, prohibition or such other writ or order appropriate to protect his rights. The petitioner also prayed that "if found necessary" the said rules should be declared to be ultra vires the powers of the Central Government and invalid being in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Arts, 14 and 19 of the Constitution. The Union of India has been impleaded as respondent 1 to the petition.

2. Before dealing with the points raised by the petition it would be necessary to refer briefly to the provisions of the Coir Industry Act, 1953 (45 of 1953), hereinafter called the Act, and the rules framed under it in 1958. This Act was enacted by the Parliament because it was thought expedient in the public interest that the Union should take under its control the coir industry. (S. 2). Section 4 of the Act provides for the establishment and constitution of the Coir Board and S. 10 enumerates its functions and duties. Under S. 10(1) it shall be the duty of the Board to promote by such measures as it thinks fit the development under the control of the Central Government of the coir industry. Sub-section (2) enumerates the measures which the Board may take with the object of developing the coir industry without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of sub-s. (1). Amongst the measures thus enumerated, sub-s. (2)(b) refers to the regulation under the supervision of the Central Government of the production of husks, coir yarn and coir products by registering coir spindles and looms for manufacturing coir products, as also manufacturers of coir products, licensing exporters of coir, coir yarn and coir products and taking such other appropriate steps as may be prescribed. Sub-section (2)(g) refers to the promotion of co-operative organisation among producers of husks coir fibre and coir yarn and manufacturers if coir Products, and sub-s. (2)(i) refers to the licensing of retting places and warehouses and otherwise regulating the stocking and sale of coir fibre, coir yarn and coir products both for internal market and for exports Section 26(1) confers on the Central Government power to make rules for carrying out the purposes of the Act subjects to the condition of previous publication. Sub-section (2) enumerates the matters in respect of which rules may be made, in particular and without prejudice to the generality of the power conferred by sub-s. (1). Sub-section (2)(k) refers inter alia to the registration of manufactures of coir products and the conditions for such registration and the grant or









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