Back
High Court Of Calcutta
ARUN KUMAR MUKHERJEE
LILA BISWAS - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
C. R. No. 8914 (w) of 1978 and C. R. No. 9911-12 (w) of 1978
Decided On : 04/03/1979
RATIONING ORDER - EXTENSION - VALIDITY - DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS - REASONABLENESS OF RESTRICTION - RIGHT TO TRADE - NATURAL JUSTICE - MONOPOLY - SUB-DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER'S ORDER - JURISDICTION.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, who were wholesalers in rice and paddy under the West Bengal Rice and Paddy (Licencing and Control) Order, 1967, challenged the validity of a notification extending the West Bengal Rationing Order, 1964 to their area, which resulted in the automatic invalidation of their licenses. They contended that the extension of the Rationing Order was ultra vires as it was not covered by a valid delegation of legislative powers, that it amounted to an unreasonable restriction on their right to trade, and that they were not given an opportunity of being heard before their licenses were invalidated.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the extension of the Rationing Order was valid as it was authorized by the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and that the delegation of legislative powers to the State Government was not excessive. It also held that the restriction on the petitioners' right to trade was reasonable in the interest of the general public, and that the petitioners were not entitled to a hearing before their licenses were invalidated as their licenses became ineffective by operation of law. The court, however, struck down the order of the Sub-divisional Controller directing the petitioners to dispose of their stocks within a particular date as the Sub-divisional Controller had no jurisdiction to issue such an order.
Issues: 1. Whether the extension of the Rationing Order was ultra vires as it was not covered by a valid delegation of legislative powers? 2. Whether the extension of the Rationing Order amounted to an unreasonable restriction on the petitioners' right to trade? 3. Whether the petitioners were entitled to a hearing before their licenses were invalidated? 4. Whether the Sub-divisional Controller had jurisdiction to issue an order directing the petitioners to dispose of their stocks within a particular date?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The extension of the Rationing Order was authorized by the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and the delegation of legislative powers to the State Government was not excessive. 2. The restriction on the petitioners' right to trade was reasonable in the interest of the general public. 3. The petitioners were not entitled to a hearing before their licenses were invalidated as their licenses became ineffective by operation of law. 4. The Sub-divisional Controller had no jurisdiction to issue an order directing the petitioners to dispose of their stocks within a particular date.
Final Decision: The Rule was discharged as all the points raised by the petitioners failed, except to the extent that the order of the Sub-divisional Controller was struck down.
( 1 ) COMMON questions of law and facts are involved in these Rules. Accordingly, these were heard together. This judgment shall dispose of a bunch of forty writ petitions.
( 2 ) BY a Gazette Notification dated August 3, 1978, the Governor in exercise of the power conferred by sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 1 of the West Bengal Rationing Order 1964 ws pleased to direct that the said order shall come into force on the 4th September 1978 in Jadavpur Police Station amongst others. Thereafter, on the 11th of August, 1978 the Sub-divisional Controller of Alipore directed the wholesalers to surrender the respective licences on the ground that they would cease to function as wholesalers of rice, paddy and wheat and the licence for the said business shall automatically be invalid. They were directed to dispose of the entire stock before 4th of September, 1978, on which date the private trade in rice and wheat would be banned.
( 3 ) THE West Bengal Rationing Order of 1964 was issued in exercise of powers conferred by section 3 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with order of the Government of India (in the Ministry of Food and Agriculture), Department of Food No. G. S. R. 888 dated 28th June, 1961 as subsequently amended by the order of the Government of India No. G. S. R. 1158 dated 14th August, 1964. By paragraph 1 (2) of the said Order (Rationing order) it extended to the whole of West Bengal. Paragraph 1 (3) says that, "it shall come into force in such areas and on such dates as the State Government may by notification in the official gazette direct".
( 4 ) THE West Bengal Rationing Order 1964 came into force in Calcutta, Burdwan, Asansole and extended to other industrial areas from time to time by notifications issued by the State Government in exercise of its power under paragraph 1 (3) of the said Order.
( 5 ) WEST Bengal Rice and Paddy (Licencing and Control) Order 1967 (hereinafter referred to as the "control Order 67") was enacted on 5th December, 1967 by the Governor in exercise of the powers conferred under section 3 of the essential Commodities Act. It was enacted for maintaining supplies and for securing equitable distribution and availability at fair prices of rice and paddy. Paragraph 1 (2) of the said Order says "it extends the whole of West Bengal except the areas in which the West Bengal Rationing Order 1964 is for the time being in force".
( 6 ) THE petitioners hold licences as wholesalers in rice and paddy under the cases, the petitioner does no longer hold any existing licence. It is stated in the Government Order No. 4017 FS dated 1st August, 1978 that, the State Government has tentatively decided to extend statutory rationing to certain area in greater Calcutta with effect from rationing week commencing from September 4, 1978. The Director of Rationing will select Ration Dealers, according to his requirements from amongst the retailers and distributors now operating in the areas in question under the modified rationing system or from outside for appointment as appointed retailers or appointed wholesalers as the case may be, provided that they are willing to be so appointed under the Wet Bengal Rationing Order 1964. The ration dealers to be newly appointed may be tagged to the existing supply godown of the Food Corporation of India. The said order further provides, that with the introduction of statutory rationing private trade in rationing article viz. rice and wheat will be banned in the areas in question. Licenced wholesaler, registered dealers of rice and licenced dealers of wheat who are at present operating in this area will, therefore, cease to function as such from the rationing date and the areas will be automatically excluded from the purview of the relevant licencing order. The licencing officer should, therefore, issue directions to the licenced dealers to the effect that they should dispose of their stock completely before the rationing date.
( 7 ) IT is alleged by
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
