Judgment

SARKAR, J.-The appellants are two companies. The first appellant owns a sugar factory and the second appellant is the lessee of a similar factory. Both these factories are situate near Siwan in the district of Saran in the State of Bihar.

The appellants moved the High Court at Patna for a writ quashing certain orders, alleged to have been passed by the Government of Bihar and its officer, the Cane Commissioner. Their grievance was that those orders were illegal as they were made in violation of the terms of the Bihar Sugar Factories Control Act, 1937 (Bihar Act 7 of 1937) and the riues made thereunder.

The respondents to the petition were the State of Bihar, the Cane Commissioner, Bihar, a company called Sree Krishna Gyanoday Sugar Ltd. (for short S. K. G. Sugar Ltd.) and certain officers of this Company. It appears that the respondent Company had on September 29, 1962, purchased a sugar mill called the Indian Siwan Factory situate in Siwan not very far from the factories of the appellants. It is said that this mill had not been worked since March 1950. The orders challenged respectively permitted resumption of the working of this mill and reserved a certain area from which it was exclusively entitled to draw its supply of sugarcane. We may state here that all the factories produced sugar from sugarcane by crushing and vacuum pan process.

The first Order is said to be contained in a letter dated October 23, 1964 written by a Secretary to the Government of Bihar to the respondent Company. It reads, If "With reference to your letter dated July 17, 1964, addressed to the ChiefMinister, Bihar, I am directed to say that it has been decided to permit you to work the Indian Siwan Factory during the coming season 1964/65. You are accordingly requested to furnish the original crushing licence held by the Indian Siwan Factory if the same be in your possession In case you do not have the licence, you will please apply for a licence in the prescribed form.

Formal order of reservation of areas and loading stations will be issued by the Cane Commissioner in due course."

The second Order is dated November 2, 1964 and was made by the Cane Commission, Bihar. It is in these terms, "In exercise of the powers delegated to me by the Central Government under clause 6 of the Sugarcane (Central) Order 1955, in Ministry of Food and Agriculture Notification No. S.R.C. 1968-Ess. Com. Sugarcane, date 1 August 27, 1955, read with Clause 4 (i) (a) of the said order, I Cane Commissioner, Bihar, hereby direct that the village named in the list below shall constitute the reserved area of Sri Krishna Gyanoday Sugar Ltd. Siwan (Saran) for the purchase of sugarcane during the season 1964|65 unless otherwise directed by me at any stage."

There is a third instrument which does not bear any date but was sent to the respondent Company under cover of a letter dated July 24, 1965 written by the Special Cane Inspector, an officer of the Bihar Government. The relevant part of it is set out below:-

"Occupier of the Shri Krishna Gyanoday Sugar Ltd., Siwan ...... Factory situated at ...... Siwan District Saran, Bihar ...... is hereby authorised to crush cane in the said Factory subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter mentioned and to the provisions of the Sugar (Control) Order, 1955."

The High Court observed that the only order that affected the petitioners was the order of November 2, 1964 and as the Bihar Act earlier mentioned provided for an appeal against it to the Government, the appellants had an independent remedy. As they had not pursued that remedy, the High Court in its discretion refused to grant them any relief on the petition for a writ under Art. 226 and did not go into any other question that arose on the petition. It is not disputed that the appellants had not filed the appeal for which the Act made provision.

The present appeal has been filed against the High Court s order by special leave.

It seems to us that this appeal has no merit. What is called