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

1978 Supreme(SC) 70

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.H. BEG, C.J.I., Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, P.N. BHAGWATI, S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, P.N. SHINGHAL, JASWANT SINGH AND D.A. DESAI, JJ.*
M/s. Prag Ice and Oil Mills and another etc. etc., Petitioners
Versus
Union of India, Respondent.
Writ Petn. Nos. 712, 715-739, 760-764, 765-770, 779-780. 781-784, 838-855, 861-873 & 874-892, 896-898 & 899-901 of 1977, D/- 21-2-1978 and 5-5-1978.
AND
Writ Petn. Nos. 712, 715-739, 760-764. 765-770, 779-780, 781-784, 838-855, 861-873 & 874-892 of 1977.
Writ Petn. Nos. 896-898 & 899-901 of 1977.
Nav Bharat Oil Mills and another etc. etc., Petitioners
Versus
Union of India, Respondent.
 
Advocate Apeared
Mr. A. K. Sen, Sr. Advocate (in W. P. 712), Mr. V. M. Tarkunde. Sr. Advocate (in W. P. 715 to 739), V. M. Tarkunde, Sr. Advocate (in W. P. 715 to 739), Mr. J. L. Nain, Sr. Advocate (in W. P. 861-892), (Mr. P. P. Juneja. Advocate with them) (in W. P. Nos) 712, (Advocate with them) (in W. P. Nos. 712, 715-739 874-892, and 861-873/77) Mr. D. Goburdhan, Advocate (in W. P. Nos 760-64 and 765 -770/77); Mr. A. K. Sen Sr. Advocate (in W. P. 779-780), Mr. S. B. Sanyal, Sr. Advocate (M/s. Ajit K. Mittar, and P. K. Mukherjee, Advocates with them) Iin W. P. No. 779-780/77), M/s D. P. Mukherjee and A. K. Ganguli, Advocates (in W. P. Nos. 781-784/77) and Mr. S. S. Ray, Sr. Advocate (M/s. W. P. Nos. 781-784/77) and Mr. S. S. Ray, Sr. Advocate (M/s. A. K. Punja and H. K. Puri, Advocates with him), (in W. P. Nos. 838- 855/77), for Petitioners; Mr. S. N. Kackar. Sol. Genl. (W. P. Nos. 712 and 838), Mr. R. P. Bhatt, Sr. Advocate (in W. P. 861) (Mr. E. C. Agarwala) and Mr. Girish Chandra. Advocates with them), for Respondent, Mr. L. N. Sinha, Sr. Advocate (Mr. U. P. Singh. Advocate with him), for Respondent - State of Bihar in W. P. Nos. 765-770, 781-784/77, Mr. A. P. Chatterjee and Mrs. Mukti Maitra Sr. Advocates, (Mr. G. S. Chatterjee, Advocate with them), for Respondent - State of West Bengal.

Advocates:
A.K.GANGULY, A.K.PUNJA, A.K.SEN GUPTA, A.P.CHATTERJEE, AJIT K.MITTAR, D.GOVERDHAN CHARY, D.P.MUKHERJI, E.C.AGARWAL, G.S.CHATTERJEE, GIRISH CHANDRA, H.K.PURI, J.Z.NAIN, L.N.Sinha, MUKTI MAITRA, P.K.MUKHERJI, P.P.JUNEJA, R.P.BHATT, S.B.SANYAL, S.N.KACKAR, S.S.RAY, Udaipratap Singh, V.M.TARKUNDE

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 19 - Essential Commodities Act, 1955 – Section 3 - business of the purchase, sale or storage for sale of mustard oil - supplies of any essential commodity or for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices - An order made this clause in relation to food grains edible oil - Seeds or edible oils may having regard to estimated production in concerned area such food grains edible oilseeds and edible oils fix quantity to be sold by producers in such area and may also fixer provide for fixation of such quantity on graded basis having regard to aggregate area held by cultivation of producers - Explanation for purpose this clause production with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions includes manufacture of edible oils and sugar – Held, It may seem unjust and oppressive yet be free from judicial interference - Problems of government are practical ones and may justify if do not require rough accommodations illogicality may be and unscientific - But even such criticism should not be hastily expressed - What is best is not always discernible wisdom of any choice may be disputed or condemned - Mere errors of government are not subject to our judicial review - It is only its palpably arbitrary exercises which can be declared void - Parliament having entrusted fixation of prices to expert judgment of Government it would be wrong for this Court as was done by common consent in Premier Automobiles to examine each and every minute detail pertaining to Governmental decision – Government as was said in Permian Basin Area Rate Cases - Entitled to make pragmatic adjustments which may be called for by particular circumstances price control can be declared unconstitutional only if it is patently arbitrary discriminatory demonstrably irrelevant policy which legislature free to adopt Interest of producer and investor is only one variables in constitutional calculus of reasonableness and Court ought not to interfere so long as exercise of Governmental power to fix fair prices is broadly within zone of reasonableness - If court were to embark upon an examination of disparate contention raised before us on behalf of contending parties court have no doubt that we shall have exceeded our narrow and circumscribed authority - Petitions dismissed

JUDGMENT

BEG. C.J.I. (for self and on behalf of D. A. Desai J. on 21.2.1978) :— The ninety-one writ petitions before us for delivery of our reasons in support of our order dated 23 Nov. 1977 dismissing them, raised a common question of the validity of an order (hereinafter referred to as the Control Order), passed on 30th September, 1977 by the Ministry of Civil Supplies and Co-operation of the Government of India, which runs as follows.

"ORDER

New Delhi, the 30th September, 1977

S. O. WHEREAS the Central Government is of opinion that it is necessary and expedient so to do for securing equitable distribution and availability at fair prices, of mustard oil.

NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by S.3 of the Essential Commodities Act. 1955 (10 of 1955), the Central Government hereby makes the following orders namely;

1. Short title, extent and commencement -(1) This order may be called the Mustard Oil (Price Control) Order, 1977.

(2). It extends to the whole of India.

(3) It shall come into force at once.

2. Definition : - In this Order, "dealer" means a person engaged in the business of the purchase, sale or storage for sale of mustard oil.

3. Price at which a dealer may sell. No dealer shall, either by himself or by any person on his behalf, sell or offer to sell any mustard oil at a retail price exceeding Rupees 10/- per kilogram, exclusive of the cost of container but inclusive of taxes.

Sd/-

(T. Balakrishnan),

Joint Secretary to the Govt. of India.

(File No. 206 (16)/77 ECR)".

2. The Control Order was passed in exercise of the powers conferred upon the Central Government by S. 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). This provision lays down:

"S. 3 (1) If the Central Government is of opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do for maintaining or increasing supplies of any essential commodity or for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices, or for securing any essential commodity for the defence of India or the efficient conduct of military operations it may, by order, provide for regulating or prohibiting the production, supply and distribution thereof and trade and commerce therein.

2) Without prejudice to the generality of the powers conferred by sub-section (1), an order made thereunder may provide.

a) xxx xxx xxx

b) xxx xxx xxx

c) for controlling the price of which any essential commodity may be bought or sold

d) for regulating by licences, permits or otherwise the storage, transport, distribution. disposal, acquisition, use or consumption of, any essential commodity;

(e) for prohibiting the withholding from sale of any essential commodity ordinarily kept for sale;

(f) for requiring any person holding in stock, or engaged in the production, or in the business of buying or selling, of any essential commodity";

(a) to sell the whole or a specified part of the quantity held in stock or produced or received by him, or.

(b) in the case of any such commodity which is likely to be produced or received by him, to sell the whole or a specified part of such commodity when produced or received by him,

to the Central Government or a State Government or an officer or agent of such Government or to a Corporation owned or controlled by such Government or to such other person or class of persons and in such circumstances as may be specified in the matter.

Explanation 1.- An order made under this clause in relation to foodgrains, edible oil - seeds or edible oils, may, having regard to the estimated production, in the concerned area, of such foodgrains, edible oilseeds and edible oils, fix the quantity to be sold by the producers in such area and may also fix, or provide for the fixation of, such quantity on a graded basis, having regard to the aggregate of the area held by, or under the cultivation of the, producers.

Explanation 2 - For the purpose of this clause, "production" with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions includes manufacture of edible oils and s




































































































































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