Dinesh Gurjar vs Union of India - 1999 Supreme(MP) 67

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1999 Supreme(MP) 67

1999 (2) JLJ 37
C.K. Prasad, J.
Dinesh Gurjar v. Union of India and others
W.P. No. 2495 of 1998; Decided on 22.1.1999.

Advocates:
Rohit Arya for petitioner; Abhay Gohil with O.P. Namdeo for respondent No.
1.; S.L. Saxena, Advocate General for respondent No.2; Satish Agnihotri for
respondent No.3.

Headnote:(1) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- writ petition under -- manager of distributor of Bhutan lotteries -- duly authorised to file writ petition -- claiming benefit under international agreement -- has locus-standi to file petition. [Para 7]
       (2) Lottery (Regulation) Act, 1988 -- S. 5 -- ‘Other State‘ under -- cannot be read to mean kingdom of Bhutan -- provision under -- cannot he invoked to ban Bhutan Lottery. [Para 10]
       (3) Constitution of India -- Sch. II List 1 Entry 40 and List II Entry 34 -- Entry 40 of List I provides "lotteries orgartised by the Government of India or the Government of a State" -- under these powers Parliament has enacted "Lottery (Regulation) Act, 1998" -- under Entry 34 of II List -- State of M.P. has enacted "M.P. Lottery Pratibandh Adhiniyam, 1993" -- both the enactments have been enacted in their respective competence field. AIR 1984 SC 781 discussed. [Para 15]
       (4) Constitution of India -- Sch. VII List I Entry 14 and Art. 253 -- powers under Entry 14 relating to treaty is exclusive with the Parliament -- implementation of treaty involving legislation or change of law of any State -- it should be achieved by enacting a law under Art. 253. [Para 15]
       (5) Lottery Pratibandh Adhiniyam, 1993 (M.P.) -- S. 3 -- enactment of the Act falls in full competence of State Legislature -- prohibition of lottery contained under -- applies to every ‘person‘ -- ‘person‘ as used under includes "the lottery of Royal Government of Bhutan‘‘. [Para 16]
       (6) Constitution of India -- Arts. 73 and 253 -- M.P. Lottery Prtibandh Adhiniyam, 1993 -- S. 3 -- executive powers of Central Government -- cannot override valid piece of legislation prevailing in State -- in such case Parliament should enact a law under Art. 253 to enforce treaty with another country -- Bhutan lottery cannot run in State of M.P. as prohibited by State Law. AIR 1969 SC 783 discussed. [Paras 17 to 19]
       ¼1½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq- 226 && fjV ;kfpdk && HkwVku ykVfj;ksa ds forjd dk izca/kd && fjV ;kfpdk Qkby djus ds fy, lE;d~ :i ls izkf/kd`r && varjkZ"Vªh; le>kSrs ds v/khu Qk;ns dk nkok && ;kfpdk Qkby djus dk vf/kdkj gSA ¿ iSjk 7
       ¼2½ ykVjh ¼fofu;eu½ vf/kfu;e] 1988 && /kkjk 5 && ^vU; jkT;* && ^HkwVku dh jkt‘kkgh* vFkZ gksus dk ikB ugha fd;k tk ldrk && mica/k && HkwVku ykVjh izfrcaf/kr djus ds fy, vkJ; ugha fy;k tk ldrkA ¿ iSjk 10
       ¼3½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuqlwph 2 lwph 1 izfof"V 40 rFkk lwph 2 izfof"V 34 && lwph 1 dh izfof"V 40 esa ^^Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk lapkfyr vFkok fdlh jkT; ljdkj }kjk lapkfyr ykVjh** micaf/kr gS && bu ‘kfDr;ksa ds v/khu laln us ykVjh ¼fofu;eu½ vf/kfu;e] 1988 vf/kfu;fer fd;k gS && nksuksa vf/kfu;fefr;k¡ mudh viuh&viuh l{kerk ds {ks= esa vf/kfu;fer dh xbZ gSaA , vkb vkj 1984 ,l lh 781 foosfprA ¿ iSjk 15
       ¼4½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuqlwph 7 lwph 1 izfof"V 14 rFkk vuq- 253 && izfof"V 14 ds v/khu laf/k ls lacaf/kr ‘kfDr vuU; :i ls laln ds ikl gS && laf/k dk;kZfUr fd, tkus ds fy, fo/kk;u vFkok fdlh jkT; dh fofk esa ifjorZu varoZfyr && vuq- 253 ds v/khu fof/k vf/kfu;fer dj ds og miyC/k fd;k tkuk pkfg,A ¿ iSjk 15
       ¼5½ ykVjh izfrca/k vf/kfu;e] 1993 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 3 && vf/kfu;e dk vf/kfu;eu jkT; fo/kku&eaMy dh iw.kZ l{kerk esa vkrk gS && blds v/khu ykVjh dk izfr"ks/k && izR;sd ^O;fDr* dks ykxw gksrk gS && ;Fkk iz;qDr ^O;fDr* esa ^^HkwVku dh jktdh; ljdkj dh ykVjh** lfEEfyr gSA ¿ iSjk 10
       ¼6½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq- 73 rFkk 253 && e-iz- ykVjh izfrca/k vf/kfu;e] 1993 && /kkjk 3 && dsanzh; ljdkj dh dk;Ziky ‘kfDr;k¡ && jkT; izofrZr fof/kekU; vf/kfu;eu dk v/;kjksg.k ugha dj ldrha && ,sls ekeys esa vU; ns‘k ls laf/k dk ikyu djkus ds fy, laln }kjk vuq- 253 ds v/khu fof/k vf/kfu;fer dh tkuk pkfg, && jkT; fof/k }kjk fuf"k) gksus ds dkj.k HkwVku ykVjh e/; izns‘k jkT; esa py ugha ldrhA , vkb vkj 1969 ,l lh 783 foosfprA ¿ iSjk 17 ls 19

ORDER

1. By this writ petition, filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus or for any other appropriate writ, order or direction restraining respondents No.2 and 3 in creating hindrance in sale of lottery tickets of the Royal Government of Bhutan in the State of Madhya Pradesh. Petitioner is the manager of M/s. Surya Enterprise, which is the distributors of lotteries of Royal Government of Bhutan and has been authorised by it to file the writ petition.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that an agreement was entered into between the Govt. of India and the Govt. of Bhutan on 29.2..1995 on Trade and Commerce between the Royal Govt. of Bhutan and the Govt. of Republic of India (Annex. P-2). Article 1 of the agreement contemplates free Trade & Commerce between the territories of the kingdom of Bhutan and the Republic of India. Protocol to the agreement on Trade & Commerce further stated that for the purposes of the agreement the term "free Trade & Commerce" in Article 1 shall be understood to include within its scope sale of Bhutan lottery tickets in India and the sale of Indian Govt. or State Lottery tickets in Bhutan subject to the relevant laws which may be enforced in the territory of the kingdom of Bhutan and India, as the "Case may be According to Article 11 of the sai9 agreement, the agreement was to come into force w.e.f. 2nd March, 1995 and to remain in force for a period of 10 years. It is the stand of the petitioner that although Section 3 of the M.P. Lottery Pratibandh Act, 1993, has not prohibited sale of lottery organised, conducted and promoted by any of the State Govt. or Union Territory within the State of M.P., still the petitioner who carries on his business of selling and marketing lottery tickets of Royal Government of Bhutan in the State of Madhya Pradesh, is not being permitted to sell lottery tickets of the Royal Govt. of Bhutan. It is the stand of the petitioner that taking shelter behind the provision of M.P. Act No.8 of 1993, the functionaries of the State are putting restrain on sale of lottery tickets of the Royal Govt. of Bhutan. Petitioner's further stand is that the State Govt. is not empowered to prohibit the sale of lottery tickets of any other State Govt. and the lottery tickets of the Royal Govt. of Bhutan being the lottery tickets of another country, sale of lottery tickets of Royal Govt. of Bhutan cannot be interfered with by the State Govt. Further plea of the petitioner is that under Section 5 of the Lottery (Regulation) Act, 1998, State Govt. can prohibit the sale of tickets of a lottery organised, conducted or promoted by another State and not of another country, with whom on account of agreement, it has right to sell the lottery tickets.

3. It is relevant here to state that detrimental social and economic impact of the lottery business particularly on the poorer section of the society, leading to serious adverse effect on public order was taken cognizance of by the Legislative Assembly; which passed a resolution requesting the Union Govt. to ban lotteries of States. Before this could be done, the Governor of the State promulgated M.P. Lottery Pratibandh Ordinance, 1992 on 18.11.1992. This was followed by another Ordinance and ultimately became an Act of the State Legislature namely Madhya Pradesh Lottery Pratibhandh Act, 1993 (M.P. Act No.8 of 1993).

4. It is relevant here to state that to regulate the sale of lottery tickets, the President of the Republic of India promulgated the Lotteries (Regulation) Ordinance, 1997 which was later on enacted as an Act of Parliament namely the Lottery (Regulation) Act, 1998 (Act No. 17 of 1998), hereinafter referred to as the Central Act. Section 5 of the said Act gives discretion to the State Govt. to prohibit the sale of tickets of lottery organised, conducted or promoted by every other States within the State. It seems that afte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1999 Supreme(MP) 67

1999 (2) JLJ 37C.K. Prasad, J.Dinesh Gurjar v. Union of India and othersW.P. No. 2495 of 1998; Decided on 22.1.1999.

Cases Referred (3)

1999 (2) JLJ 37
C.K. Prasad, J.
Dinesh Gurjar v. Union of India and others
W.P. No. 2495 of 1998; Decided on 22.1.1999.