S. RAJENDRA BABU, K. G. BALAKRISHNAN, P. VENKATARAMA REDDI
U. P. Co-operative Cane Unions Federations – Appellant
Versus
West U. P. Sugar Mills Association – Respondent
Majority Judgment
G.P. Mathur, J. [For S. Rajendra Babu, CJI, K.G. Balakrishnan, J. and for himself]-The controversy raised in these appeals by special leave and Transfer Petitions basically relates to the competence of the State Government to fix the State Advised Price for purchase of sugarcane by an occupier of a sugar factory over and above the minimum price fixed by the Central Government. The validity of the procedure adopted for ensuring the payment of the aforesaid price to a sugarcane grower is also under challenge.
2. The power of the State Government to fix higher sugarcane price was recognised in Maharashtra Rajya Sahkari Sakkar Karkhana Sangh Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 1995 (Supp) 3 SCC 475 and in State of M.P. v. Jaora Sugar Mills Ltd.& Ors. (1997) 9 SCC 207 it was held that the State Government has an obligation to ensure payment of proper price to the sugarcane growers by occupiers of the factory. However some observations made in State of Tamilnadu & Ors. v. Kothari Sugar & Chemicals Ltd. & Ors. (1996) 7 SCC 751 apparently indicate that State Government has no power to fix the price. In view of this seeming conflict, the cases were initially referred for dec
Rai Saheb, Ram Jawaya Kapoor v. State of Punjab
Popatlal Shah v. State of Madras
Ch. Tika Ramji & Ors. v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Indian Steel & Wire Products Ltd. v. State of Madras
Andhra Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of Andhra Pradesh
State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. v. Thakur Bharat Singh
VSR & Oil Mills v. State of A.P.
M. Karunanidhi v. Union of India
M/s. Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. State of Bihar
National Engineering Industries Ltd. v. Sri Kishan Bhageria & Ors.
Maharashtra Rajya Sahkari Sakkar Karkhana Sangh Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
State of Tamilnadu v. M/s. Hindu Stone & Ors.
K. Ramanathan v. State of Tamilnadu & Anr.
Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. & Anr. v. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board & Anr.
Quarry Owners’ Association v. State of Bihar
Sukhnandan Saran Dinesh Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.
S. Satyapal Reddy & Ors. v. Govt. of A.P. & Ors.
Dr. Preeti Srivastava v. State of M.P. & Ors.
SKG Sugar Ltd. v. State of Bihar
State of Andhra Pradesh v. Lavu Narendranath
Deepak Theatre, Dhuri v. State of Punjab & Ors.
State of M.P. v. Jaora Sugar Mills Ltd. & Ors.
State of Tamilnadu & Ors. v. Kothari Sugar & Chemicals Ltd. & Ors. (1996) 7 SCC 751. (Para 2)
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.