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

1990 Supreme(SC) 554

K.N.SINGH, KULDIP SINGH, T.K.THOMMEN
Punjab Traders – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates:
C.M.NAYAR, Dhruv Mehta, G.L.SANGHI, S.K.Gambhir, Surender Karnail, VIVEK GAMBHIR

Judgment

THOMMEN, J.:- This appeal by special leave arises from the Judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 1378 of 1973. The appellants in the writ petition challenged the constitutionality of the East Punjab Molasses (Control) Amendment Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the "Amendment Act, 1973") on the ground that the said amendment had not received the previous sanction of the President of India in terms of Article 304(b) of the Constitution. The High Court dismissed the writ petition holding that the appellants were not shown to have been aggrieved by the impugned amendment.

2. The Amendment Act, 1973 amended the provisions of the East Punjab Molasses (Control) Act, 1948 (East Punjab Act No. 11 of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as the "Principal Act"), as it stood at the relevant time. The Principal Act had been earlier amended in 1950, 1957, 1964 and 1968. It was subsequently amended in 1976. The appellants have, however, challenged only the Amendment Act, 1973 and have significantly not challenged the earlier or subsequent amendments. Rejecting the appellants contentions, the High Court observed :-

"..........We have very carefully gone throug







































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top