1. As I see it, the only question in this case is whether clause (1) of R.50(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules made by the Central Government under S.23 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and, with it, the notification dated 11-1-1962 issued thereunder by the State Government, are ultra vires the section. The rule says that no person shall manufacture, sell, stock, distribute or exhibit for sale the articles specified therein except under a licence. Clauses (a) to (k) specify various articles of food; but what the impugned clause, clause (1), does, is to include within the prohibition "any other article of food (x x x x x) which the State Government may by notification specify." It was in pursuance of this authority that the State Government by its notification dated 11-1-1962, published in the Gazette of the 6th February 1962, specified a number of articles of food, tea being one of them, as articles which no person shall manufacture, sell, stock, distribute or exhibit for sale, except under a licence. The petitioner, a travelling salesman of a tea company, was admittedly going about selling tea to the stockists of the company; and, admitte