By the Court.—These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution impugned the validity of the Government Orders dated 2.6.2008, 20.11.2008 and 24.12.2008 issued by the State Government whereby certain directions have been issued inter alia for installation of dispensing units through which the kerosene is to be sold. The Government Order dated 20.11.2008 extend the earlier time fixed to 31.3.2009. The third Government Order dated 24.12.2008 is also a consequential order whereby it was made clear that in case the directions issued in earlier Government Orders is not complied with the penal action shall be taken against the earring dealers.

2. As common question of law are involved and the facts of the cases of batch of writ petitions are also similar, the above writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment.

3. Before we advert to the legal question, we may briefly set out the facts in the background. We shall refer the facts of the Writ Petition No. 16929 of 2009 (M/s Motiram Manoharlal and others v. State of U.P. and others) as a lead petition.

4. The petitioners are the wholesale dealers they have their license under provision of U.P. Kerosene Control, 1962. They have their sale Depots./Godown in different places in district of Mahamaya Nagar they are supplied kerosene oil by Oil Companies. The State Government issued aforementioned three Government Orders i.e. Dated 2.6.2008 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition); 20.11.2008 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) and 24.12.2008 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) whereby they have been directed to instal dispensing units for the sale of kerosene. The petitioners state that they are supplying oil to their fair price shop keepers and they do not have any direct public dealing. There was no need at all for installing dispensing unit. The said unit is used by retail dealers as they sell directly to the public. The petitioners are distributing through filter machine, therefore there is absolutely no requirement of installation of dispensing unit. They further state that the dispensing unit will cost them about Rs. 2,50,000/- and as such it imposes unreasonable restrictions on their trade/business inviting the wreath of Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. In some of the petitions the petitioners in addition to aforesaid grievance are also aggrieved by one of the requirement of the Government Order that all the wholesale dealers must have storage capacity of minimum 20 Kilo Litre kerosene oil.

5. We have heared Sri Ravi Kant learned Senior Adovcate assisted by Sri Tarun Agarwal, Sri H.R.Mishra learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Mahesh Narain Singh and Sri Ram Niwas Singh learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jaffar Naiyar Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Ravi Shanker Prasad, and Sri Ramanand Pandey, learned Standing Counsel.

6. Sri Ravi Kant learned Senior Counsel submitted that the impugned Government Orders are nonest having been issued without semblance of authority in the State Government to do so. He further submitted that the U.P. Kerosene Control Order, 1962 is a complete code. The wholesale dealers do not deal with the public and it is the only retail dealers who sell the kerosene oil to the public as such both of them cannot be treated equally. The impugned Government Orders treats unequivocally therefore it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The aforesaid orders per se imposes wholly unreasonable restrictions and the right of trade has guaranteed by Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution, therefore Government Orders are wholly unreasonable.

7. Sri Ravi Kant learned Senior Counsel has relied on the following judgments : State of U.P. v. Daulat Ram Gupta, (2002) 4 SCC 98; Government of Andra Pradesh and others v. M.T. Khan, (2004) 1 SCC 616; Global Energy Ltd. v. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, (2009) 15 SCC 570; Humanity v. State of West Bengal, (2011) 6 SCC 125.

8. Sri H.R.Mishra learned Senior Counsel submitted