JUDGMENT :

G.S. Kulkarni, J.

1. This is a batch of petitions in which a common challenge has been raised, they are hence being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The petitioners essentially have prayed for reliefs that Rule 19 of the Bombay Molasses Rules, 1955 (for short “1955 Rules”) and the circulars/notifications issued therein be declared to be ultra vires and unconstitutional. There is a further prayer to assail notification dated 1 November, 2017 issued by the State Government, which is titled as Bombay Mollasses (Amendment) Rules, 2017[*subsequently amended to Re.1/- per metric ton by notification dated 19 June, 2020], by which Rule 19 has been amended in regard to imposition of a levy of Rs.500/- per metric ton for issuance of the permit under Rule 18 for a person desiring to transport molasses.

3. The challenge as mounted by the petitioners emerges from the implementation and actions being resorted by the respondents-State under the 1955 Rules. These are rules which are framed by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 143 of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 and in supercession of the erstwhile Bombay Molasses Rules, 1947.

The rules defines “Factory” to mean a place where sugar or gur is manufactured [Rule 2(1)(b)]. It defines “Licensed premises” to mean premises in respect of which a license is granted under the said rules [Rule 2(1)(d)]. The term “Licensee” is defined under Rule 2(1)(e) to mean a person holding a license in Form M-I, M-II or M-III. The term “Producer of Molasses” is defined under Rule 2(1)(f) to mean a person who is in charge of a factory where molasses is produced in the process of manufacture of sugar or gur. Rule 3 provides for “Possession and sale of molasses” and stipulates that any person who is a producer of molasses and desires to possess and sell molasses shall make an application to the Collector for a licence in that behalf. Rule 3-A provides for “Renewal of License”. Rule 4 provides for license to be issued to a person, other than a producer of molasses, who desires to possess and use molasses. Rule 11 provides that no person shall sell molasses unless he is holding a license in Form M-I or M-III. Rule 12 provides for Import of molasses. Rule 14 provides for Export of molasses and for obtaining a license for the same. Rule 18 is a rule pertaining to transport of molasses and Rule 19, being the relevant rule, provides for the procedure for grant of license and for payment of fees. It is necessary to note Rules 18 and 19, as the entire controversy revolves around these provisions, which reads thus:

“18. Transport –

Any person desiring to transport molasses, shall make an application to the Collector or any other authorised officer under sub-section (3) of section 61 of the Act for a permit in that behalf. The application shall contain the following particulars, namely :-

1. Name and address of the applicant;

2. Kind of the licence held in respect of molasses by the applicant and its number and date;

3. Quantity of molasses permitted for possession at any one time under the above licence (in quintals);

4. Balance of molasses on hand on the date of application (in quintals);

5. Quantity of molasses to be transported in (in quintals);

6. (a) Place from which molasses is to be transported;

(b) Place to which molasses is to be transported;

7. Name of the person authorised to transport molasses;

8. Name and address of the person from whom molasses will be obtained;

9. Route (state also the place from and to which transport of molasses will be by road);

10. Period for which the permit is required.

19.(1) On receipt of an application under Rule 18, the Collector or the authorised officer may make such inquiries as he deems necessary and if he is satisfied that there is no objection to grant the permit applied for, he may grant a permit in Form M-VI on payment of a fee at the rat