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

1956 Supreme(Gau) 10

Manipur High Court
BRIJ NARAIN, J.
Chunilall Rajendra Kumar
Versus
State of Manipur
Civil Misc. (Writ) Appln. No. 27 of 1955
Decided On : 17-02-1956

Advocates:
K.C. Chakraverty and R.K. Singh, for Petitioner; S.C. Bardhan Government Advocate, for Respondents.

The Court held that the Manipur Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 1955 was unconstitutional and unreasonable as it imposed unreasonable restrictions on the petitioners' fundamental right to carry on trade and business under Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

Headnote:

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955 - MANIPUR FOODGRAINS (MOVEMENT) CONTROL ORDER, 1955 - VALIDITY - RESTRICTIONS ON EXPORT OF FOODGRAINS - REASONABLENESS - FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS - ART. 19(1)(G) - WRIT OF MANDAMUS.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, a joint Hindu family partnership firm carrying on business in Manipur, challenged the Manipur Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 1955, issued by the Chief Commissioner of Manipur under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The order restricted the export of foodgrains from Manipur without a permit. The petitioners contended that the order was unconstitutional and unreasonable as it violated their fundamental right to carry on trade and business under Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the Manipur Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 1955 was unconstitutional and unreasonable as it imposed unreasonable restrictions on the petitioners' fundamental right to carry on trade and business under Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The Court found that the order was not in accordance with the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and that it was not necessary for the protection of the public interest.

Issues: 1. Whether the Manipur Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 1955 was unconstitutional and unreasonable? 2. Whether the order violated the petitioners' fundamental right to carry on trade and business under Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Manipur Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 1955 was unconstitutional and unreasonable as it imposed unreasonable restrictions on the petitioners' fundamental right to carry on trade and business under Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. 2. The Court found that the order was not in accordance with the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and that it was not necessary for the protection of the public interest.

Final Decision: The Court issued a writ of mandamus to the Chief Commissioner of Manipur restraining the Government of Manipur from interfering with the business of the petitioners. The petitioners were awarded Rs. 100/- each as costs in both petitions from the Chief Commissioner of Manipur.

ORDER

This is an application on behalf of Chunilal Rajendra Kumar, a joint Hindu family partnership firm carrying on business at Maxwell Bazar, P.S. Imphal, for obtaining a writ of mandamus or a writ of a like nature or an order directing the respondent 1 to refrain from interfering with the business of the petitioner and for quashing any order that might have been passed against the petitioner disallowing him from exporting 252 maunds of chira purchased at Imphal in February/March, 1955 for the purpose of earning sufficient profits during the course of carrying on its business in various commodities including foodstuffs of rice, paddy, chira etc.

2. The petitioner has been carrying on wholesale business in various commodities including foodstuffs of rice, paddy, chira etc., and according to the petitioner the right of free trade in rice, paddy, chira and other similar commodities and also for export from Manipur to places outside Manipur has been guaranteed by the Central Government Notification No. PY-11-656(36)/54 dated 10-7-1954, which was issued in exercise of the powers conferred under S. 3, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946, which runs as follows :

"As from the date of the commencement of this order there shall be no prohibition, restriction or control on the movement of rice from any place in a State to any other place within or outside that State nor shall there be any regulation or control in any manner whatsoever in relation to the production price or distribution and price".

3. This notification was issued in substitution of the prior notification dated 20-10-1951, No. DR/80/FCO/51, which was published in the State of Manipur, Extra-ordinary Gazette, No. 61/E.31 dated 24-1-1952 and the Manipur State Government is alleged to have continued the enforcement of Manipur Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 1951, even subsequently in contravention of the aforesaid Order of the Central Government and thus the powers under the Manipur Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 1951, which was issued in the exercise of the powers conferred by S. 3, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946, which had been made applicable to Manipur earlier were exercised later on also. The Manipur Government had ordered by this notification of 1951 that no person should export or attempt to export any rice, paddy or products thereof from Manipur to any place outside Manipur except under and in accordance with a permit issued by the State Government in this behalf. The Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 (Act 24 of 1946) expired on 26-1-1955 and Essential Commodities Ordinance (Act 1 of 1955) was enforced, but "foodstuffs" were excluded from the definition of the "Essential Commodity" defined in S. 2 of the said Ordinance.

4. The petitioner after purchasing 252 maunds of chira, worth about Rs. 3,000/- in February/March, 1955 for earning sufficient profits by exporting the goods from Manipur to places outside Manipur, also made commitments with certain merchants outside Manipur for exporting the said chira, but the goods could not be exported in spite of serious attempts by the petitioner to transport the said quantity of chira from Manipur to places outside Manipur on 31-5-1955 as they were stopped by the Police at Kangpokpi, even though a writ of mandamus had been issued that very day by this Court against Respondent 1 in Mohan Singh Thapa v. Inspector General of Police, Manipur, 1956 Manipur 13 ( (S) AIR V43) (A). The petitioner has further alleged that at about 7-00 p.m. on 31-5-1955, respondent 1 issued a notification No. CS/3/55 (Manipur Foodgrains (Movement) Control Order, 1955), which was published in the Manipur State Gazette, Extra-ordinary of the same date whereby it was provided by S. 3 :

"(a) No person shall export or attempt to export any foodgrains from Manipur to any place outside Manipur, except under and in accordance with a permit issued by the State Government or any officer authorised by the State Gov




































































































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