Hon’ble Rajiv Sharma, J.—Heard S/Sri Bharat ji Agarwal & R.N.Trivedi, Senior Advocates assisted by Dr R.K.Srivastava, Akhilesh Kalra, Dhruv Mathur on behalf of the petitioners and Sri J.N.Mathur, Addl. Advocate General assisted by Sri H.P.Srivastava, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents-State.

2. Petitioners are the Public Limited Companies in terms of Companies Act, 1956 and are engaged in the business of manufacturing sugar by Vacuum Pan Process and to sugar factories, distilleries are also attached. Molasses, is the bye-product of the sugar mill owned by the petitioners’ company which is the raw-material for distilleries and is utilized at the distilleries for captive/own consumption.

3. In all the afore-captioned writ petitions, the petitioners have questioned the validity of Clause 2(d-1), 8(4) and 8(5) of the U.P. Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam [hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned Act’ for the sake of brevity] as amended by the U.P. Act No. 10 of 2009, therefore, all the writ petitions have been clubbed together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. By these petitions, the petitioners have assailed the levy of “Administrative Charges” on the molasses, which is carried outside the premises of the Sugar factories, maybe for own distilleries located at distinct places.

4. According to petitioners, the following amendments have been made in the principal Act, i.e. U.P. Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam, 1964 :

(i) A new clause (d) (i) “molasses for captive consumption” has been added in Section 2 of the U. P. Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam, 1964. The impugned Act seeks to restrict the meaning of the expression “molasses for captive consumption” to mean and include only such transfer of molasses by an occupier of the sugar factory to a distillery or to industrial unit having the same ownership provided the distillery or industrial unit is situated within the same premises or where it is in such “contiguous vicinity” of the sugar factory so that the transfer or transportation of such molasses outside the premises or the gate of the sugar factory is not required to be effected by a vehicle.

(ii) Section 8 of the Act has also been amended and by the said impugned amendment in sub-section (1) of Section 8 of the Principal Act, the words “sell or supply” have been substituted by the words “transfer or sell or supply” and in sub-sections (4) and (5) of the Section 8 of the Principal Act, the words “sold or supplied” have been substituted by the words “transferred or sold or supplied”.

5. Therefore, it has been strenuously argued that the effect of these amendments is that the sugar factory will be required to pay administrative charges even on molasses, which is transferred to its own distillery, although it does not involve any sale or commercial transaction and the molasses is required for captive consumption.

6. According to learned Counsel for the petitioners, the storage, gradation and control of molasses produced by the sugar factories in Uttar Pradesh including regulation of its supply and distribution is governed by the provisions of 1964 Adhiniyam. In the statutory scheme so laid in the Adhiniyam of 1964, a person requiring molasses for his distillery or for any purposes of industrial development is obliged to apply to the Controller of Molasses in terms of Section 7-A of the Adhiniyam of 1964. Sub-Section (4) of Section 8 provides that occupier of a factory shall be liable to pay to the State Government administrative charges on the molasses “sold or supplied” by him. The administrative charges are intended to be levied only in the circumstances where there is a sale or supply by the sugar factory to some other legal entity by transfer of title for valuable consideration as enshrined in the Constitution of India.

7. Every year, the Excise Commissioner and Controller of Molasses issues a Molasses Policy with regard to supply and sale of molasses by the sugar factories. Accordingly, the Molas