ELIPE DHARMA RAO, J.

1. All the writ appeals arise out of the common order passed by the learned single Judge in WP.No.16908 of 2009 & etc. batch, dated 20.08.2010. Most of the writ petitions were filed challenging various provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (Central Act 27 of 2006) as unconstitutional. Some writ petitions were filed challenging the orders passed by the Facilitation Council and the notices issued by the said Council. Since the issues involved in all these matters are intrinsically interconnected, they were heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. In most of all these writ appeals and the writ petitions, some of the provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (Central Act 27 of 2006) (in short "MSMED Act") are challenged as unconstitutional and ultra vires of the Constitution of India. The learned single Judge under the impugned order dated 20.08.2010, held that the provisions under challenge cannot be said to be unconstitutional and ultra vires and dismissed the writ petitions, giving rise to the present writ appeals.

3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for all the parties at length and have gone through various records furnished at the time of hearing of these appeals and the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court and various other High Courts.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and the counsel appearing in the connected writ appeals and the writ petitions have more or less reiterated the contentions raised before the learned single Judge. Their challenge encircles Chapter V of the MSMED Act.

4. In order to appreciate their contentions, it would be profitable to note down, first, the Statements and Objects for enacting the MSMED Act. This Act has been enacted for facilitating the promotion and development and enhancing the competitiveness of micro, small and medium enterprises. From the Statement of Objects and Reasons for enacting the Act, it is seen that many Expert Groups or Committees appointed by the Government from time to time as well as the small scale industry sector itself have emphasised the need for a comprehensive Central enactment to provide an appropriate legal framework for the sector to facilitate its growth and development. And also considering the growing need and to extend policy support for the small enterprises so that they can grow into medium ones, adopt better and higher levels of technology and achieve higher productivity to remain competitive in a fast globalisation area, the Union Government thought it fit to enact the MSMED Act. Through the above Bill they also sought to make further improvements in the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertaking Act, 1993 and to repeal that enactment.

5. Section 2(e) defines "enterprise" an industrial undertaking or a business concern or any other establishment, by whatever name called, engaged in the manufacture or production of goods, in any manner, pertaining to any industry specified in the First Schedule to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 (65 of 1951) or engaged in providing or rendering of any service or services.

6. According to Section 2(g) "medium enterprise" means an enterprise classified as such under sub-clause (iii) of clause (a) or sub-clause(iii) of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 7. "micro enterprise" is defined under Section 2(h). As per Section 7, if the enterprise engaged in the manufacture or production of goods pertaining to any industry and where the investment in plant and machinery is more than five crores but does not exceed ten crore rupees, it is called as medium enterprise. If the enterprise is service oriented and the investment is more than two crores but does not exceed five crore rupees, it is known as medium enterprise. In the case of micro enterprise, if it is engaged in production, th