Hon’ble Devi Prasad Singh, J.—This Court as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court has been battle ground since decades dealing with fixation of cane price contested by mill owners and cane growers at the beginning of almost every crushing season. Sugar becomes more sour every year because of rise of its price for the citizen on the one hand and because of alleged unreasonable price of cane for the farmers on the other. Pull and push continues whenever question arises with regard to fixation of cane price as well as sugar. However, we are concerned with the fixation of cane price only.

In the State of U.P., it has been noticed that sometimes farmers set ablaze their own standing crop because of allegedly lower cane price on the one hand and mill owners threat to close their mill being not satisfied with cane price fixed by the Government. There appears to be no uniform principle adopted by the Government with regard to fixation of cane price keeping in view the consumer price index, inflation, cost of living as well as production cost of the cane. Conflict between cane price fixed by the State Government and the Central Government may be noticed at the beginning of every season resulting in multiplicity of litigation.

2. Keeping in view lengthy argument, advanced by the parties’ counsel, we are adjudicating the dispute under the following heads :

(I) Statutory Provisions

(A) Amendment of Section 3 of Essential Commodities Act

(II) Legislative Competence

(III) Regulatory power of the State

III(A) Statutory interpretation, III(B) Regulatory provision

(IV) Whether the amendments (supra) prohibit the State Government to exercise power for SAP ?

(V) Welfare Legislation

(VI) Fair & Remunerative Price

(VII) Sugarcane Control Order

(VIII) State Advised Cane Price

(IX) Judicial Review of FRP & SAP

(X) Finding

(XI) Cost

(XII) Order

3. This bunch of writ petitions has been preferred by sugar mill owners assailing the recent price hike of the cane by the State Government, challenging the State Advised Cane Price (in short, SAP) for the session 2011-2012 fixed by the State Government by the impugned order dated 8.11.2011 in pursuance to power conferred by Section 16 of U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 (in short 1953 Act). By the impugned circular, the Government has fixed Rs. 250/- per quintal for early maturing variety of cane, Rs. 240/- per quintal for normal variety of cane and Rs. 235/- per quintal for rejected variety of cane purchased from the cane growers in the State of U.P.

4. Writ Petition No. 11417(M/B) of 2011 is taken as the leading writ petition for disposal of the controversy in question.

5. The petitioners 1 to 3 are association of Private Sugar Sector Factories in the State of U.P whereas the petitioners 4 to 30 are individual sugar companies which are the members of the petitioners 1 to 3. The petitioner No. 31 is a shareholder of petitioner No. 5.

6. The State Government constituted a committee under the chairmanship of Chief Secretary, Government of U.P., by the order dated 30.9.2011 to recommend for SAP. A meeting was held on 21.10.2011 and after taking into account the cost of production of sugarcane as calculated by the U.P. Council of Sugarcane Research, Shahjahanpur and other bodies for 2011-12, the Committee recommended for enhancement of sugarcane price. However, while assailing the impugned order with regard to SAP, it has been stated that U.P. Council of Sugarcane Research, Shahjahanpur, for the year 2011-12 had given opinion with regard to cost of production of sugarcane as Rs. 161.33 per quintal. According to petitioners’ counsel, in case 20% profit is added it shall come to Rs. 193/- per quintal. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, treating the cost of production including 20% profit on Rs. 193/- per quintal, the fixation of SAP at Rs. 240-250/- per quintal is excessive more so when it is not permissible under the amended Control Order, adding the word, ‘fair and remu