JUDGMENT

Pathak, J. - The petitioner is a commission agent dealing in grain. He has been served with a notice dated April 22, 1970, u/s 11 of the Emergency Risks (Goods) Insurance Act, 1962. The notice has been issued by the Chief Enforcement Officer, Emergency Risks Insurance Scheme, for the purpose of verifying whether the petitioner had complied with the requirements of that Act and the Scheme framed thereunder and for the examination of his emergency risks insurance policy. On April 22, 1970, the Chief Enforcement Officer served another notice u/s 11 of the Act requiring the petitioner to produce a number of documents.

2. In Writ Petition No. 2262 of 1970, the petitioner, who carries on the same business, has received similar notices from the Chief Enforcement Officer.

3. In Writ Petition No. 2996 of 1970, the petitioner, who is also a commission agent in the grain market, was served with a notice dated April 29, 1970, by the Chief Enforcement Officer pointing out that a cheque issued by the petitioner in payment of the premium due on certain emergency risks insurance policies had been dishonoured. The petitioner was charged with cheating the Government and was asked to show cause why criminal proceedings should not be initiated against him. On June 29, 1970, the Chief Enforcement Officer made an order u/s 8(1) of the Act determining an amount of Rs. 477 as emergency risks insurance premia, payment of which had been evaded by the petitioner for the quarters comprised in the period commencing April 1, 1963, to December 31, 1967.

4. In Writ Petition No. 2997 of 1970, the facts are similar to those in Writ Petition No. 2996 of 1970, except that it does not appear that any final determination has yet been made u/s 8(1) of the Act.

5. In Writ Petition No. 2998 of 1970 the facts are similar to those in Writ Petition No. 2262 of 1970.

6. In Writ Petition No. 3075 of 1970 the position is similar to that obtaining in Writ Petition No. 2997 of 1970.

7. The several petitioners contend that no action can now be initiated under the Emergency Risks.(Goods) Insurance Act, 1962, because the Act was a temporary statute and has already expired.

8. Upon the invasion of the northern frontier of India by the Chinese military forces, the President of India issued a proclamation under Article 352(1) of the Constitution, declaring that a grave emergency existed threatening the security of India. The proclamation of emergency continued in force until revoked under Article 352(2) of the Constitution, by a subsequent proclamation issued on January 10, 1968.

9. In order to make provision for the insurance of goods in India against damage by enemy action during the period of the emergency, Parliament enacted the Emergency Risks (Goods) Insurance Act, 1962. The material provisions may be noticed. Section 3 specifies the goods insurable under the Act. Section 5 empowers the Central Government to put into operation a scheme whereby the Government would undertake the liability of insurance against emergency risks. Section 7 prohibits a person from carrying on business in India, while the scheme is in operation, as a seller or supplier of goods unless in respect of insurable goods owned by him in the course of that business there is in force an insurance policy against emergency risks issued in accordance with the scheme. The prohibition does not extend to persons whose insurable goods do not exceed Rs. 30,000 in value. Contravention of the prohibition is punishable with fine. Section 8 provides:

"8. (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 7, where any person has failed to insure as, or to the full amount, required by this Act, and has thereby evaded payment by way of premium of any money which he would have had to pay but for such failure, an officer authorised in this behalf by the Central Government may determine the amount, payment of which has been so evaded and the amount so determined shall be payable by such person and shall be