Belsund Sugar Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar, (SC) BS87275

Belsund Sugar Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar, (SC) BS87275 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

(Large Bench)

Before:- Dr. A.S. Anand, C.J.I., S.B. Majmudar, Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, K. Venkataswami and V.N. Khare, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 398 of 1977 [with C.A. Nos. 399 of 1977, 3505, 3506 of 1992, 1880 of 1988, W.P. (C) No. 1250 of 1986, C.A.Nos. 4500-05 of 1992, 234 of 1995, 8163, 7432 of 1994, C.A.Nos. 4374-75 of 1999 @ SLP (C) Nos. 3159-60 of 1994, C.A.Nos. 2632-33 of 1982, C.A.No. 2532 of 1980, C.A.Nos. 2951, 2952 and 2953 of 1992, C.A.No. 829 of 1993, C.A.No. 4376 of 1999 @ SLP (C) No. 9684 of 1992, C.A.Nos. 1282 of 1995, 1427 of 1979]. D/d. 10.8.1999.

Belsund Sugar Co. Ltd. - Appellant

Versus

The State of Bihar and others etc. - Respondents

For the Appearing Parties :- R.N. Trivedi, Addl. Solicitor General, Shanti Bhushan, Y. V. Giri, Dipankar Gupta, G. L. Sanghi (A. K. Goel), Addl. Advocate General, Subodh Markandeya, Rakesh Dwivedi, H. N. Salve, H. L. Agrawal, Ram Janam Ojha, Sr. Advocates, Shri Narain, Ramesh K. Agrawal, H. Deorajan, Sandeep Narain, Dhruv Agarwal, Praveen Kumar, Ranjit Kumar, Ms. Binu Tamta, Chandra Bhushan, Ms. Parul Gupta, Gopal Jain, R. N. Karanjawala, Ms. Nandini Gore, Sandeep Mittal, Ms. Manik Karanjawala, Ms. Meera Mathur, A. K. Srivastava, R. B. Misra, K. Misra, Sunil Jain, Gauri Rasgotra, S. S. Khanduja, C. N. Sree Kumar, A. Subba Rao, Saket Singh, B. B. Singh, D. Goburdhan, D. N. Goburdhan, Ravinder Narain, Ms. A. K. Verma, Sanjiv Sen, Irshad Ahmad, Sudhir Kumar Gupta, M. P. Jha, Anis Ahmad Khan, S. Ganesh, Ram Ekbal Roy, Ms. Pinki Anand, Advocates.

A. Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960, Section 27 - Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Rules, 1975, Rule 82(iii) - Levy of market fee on transactions of sale of sugar and molasses - Locus standi of sugar factories to challenge levy - Sugar factories after purchasing sugarcane, manufacturing sugar and molasses and selling it to unlicensed buyers - Sugar factories as sellers realise market fee from buyers and deposit it with market committee - Sugar factories, have locus standi to challenge imposition of market fee.

[Para 12]

B. Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960, Section 42, Section 15 - Constitution of India, Article 254 -Bihar Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1982, Section 1 - Two legislations i.e. Markets Act and Sugarcane Act operating in same field - Whether the two can be reconciled or not - Fact that provisions of inconsistent enactment i.e. Market Act can be excluded by resorting to exemption power - Does not cure basic inconsistency between two legislations - Special Act i.e. Sugarcane Act held, excludes operation of General Act i.e. Market Act.

[Para 64]

C. Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Section 3 - Sugarcane (Control) Order (1966), Clause 3 - Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960, Section 15 - Sale of sugar manufactured out of sugarcane is regulated by special provisions of various orders issued under Essential Commodities Act - General provisions of Section 15 of Market Act are inapplicable.

[Paras 69 and 80]

D. Bihar Molasses (Control) Act, 1947, Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 - Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960, Section 15 - Agricultural Produce - Sale and purchase of molasses by sugar factories - Molasses being a by product resulting from manufacture of sugar is wholly controlled by special provisions of Molasses Control Act - General provisions of Market Act not applicable.

[Paras 95 and 96]

E. Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, Section 18G, Schedule 1 - Constitution of India, Article 254 - Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960, Section 27 - Agricultural Produce - Wheat and products of flour industry - Production of wheat as raw material, wheat not covered by IDR Act - Transaction of purchase and sale of products of wheat industry can be regulated by State Act i.e. Bihar Market Act - Mere existence of statutory provision in IDR Act i.e. Central Act to issue orders does not exclude State Legislature from regulating sale and purchase of products of flour industry - IDR Act deals with industries in general.

[Paras 110, 111 and 113]

F. Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960, Section 2(1)(a) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Section 3 - Essential Commodities - Agricultural Produce - Oil manufactured by crushing oil seeds is agricultural produce - Transaction of sale and purchase of vegetable oil products in market areas is regulated by Market Act and not various orders framed under Section 3 of Essential Commodities Act - because none of these orders deals with the topic of regulation of prices and sale and purchase of vegetable oil products.

[Paras 116 and 117]

G. Tea Act, 1953, Section 30 - Constitution of India, Schedule 7, List III, Entries 32, 33 and 53 - Constitution of India, Article 254 - Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960, Section 39 - Agricultural Produce - Purchase and sale of tea - No Control Order issued by Central Government under Section 30 of Tea Act regarding control price and distribution of tea and tea waste - State Legislature competent to cover the field by exercising its legislative powers under Entry 33 of Concurrent List.

[Paras 159 and 162]

H. Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960, Sections 30 and 15 - Agricultural Produce - Sale of manufactured and packed tea in market area - Levy of market fee - Is supported by adequate quid pro quo in view of benefit of infrastructural facilities made available by market committee - Not possible to contend that there is no quid pro quo underlying transactions of sale of packed tea by the appellant's stockist in the market yards maintained by the market committee concerned.

[Para 184]

Cases Referred :-

Belsund Sugar Co. Ltd., Riga v. The State of Bihar, AIR 1977 Patna 136.

M.C.V.S. Arunachala Nadar v. State of Madras, 1959 Supp (1) SCR 92.

Vasavi Traders v. State of Karnataka, (1982) 2 Kant LJ 357.

I.T.C. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, 1985 (Suppl) SCC 476.

Jugal Kishore v. State of Maharashtra, 1989 Suppl (1) SCC 589.

S. Satyapal Reddy v. Government of A.P., (1994) 4 SCC 391.

SIEL Ltd. v. Union of India, (1998) 7 SCC 26 1998 All LJ 2239).

Kewal Krishan Puri v. State of Punjab, (1980) 1 SCC 416.

Hingir-Rampur Coal Co. Ltd. v. The State of Orissa (1961) 2 SCR 537, at page 558.

Ram Chandra Kailash Kumar and Company v. State of U.P., 1980 (Supp) SCC 27.

Rameshchandra Kachardas Porwal v. State of Maharashtra (1981) 2 SCC 722.

Rathi Khandsari Udyog v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1985) 2 SCC 485.

Ch. Tika Ramji v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1956 SCR 393.

Shyamakant Lal v. Rambhajan Singh, 1939 FCR 193, 212.

Attorney-General for Ontario v. Attorney-General for Dominion (1896 ACT 348).

JUDGMENT

S.B. Majmudar, J. - Leave granted in the Special Leave Petitions.

2. These appeals and writ petitions mainly raise the question regarding the legality of the levy of market fee under the provisions of Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Market Act' for short). The grievance made by the appellants/writ petitioners pertained to the following commodities with which the respective proceedings are concerned.

1. Sugarcane, Sugar and Molasses (briefly referred to as 'Sugar matters');

2. Wheat products Atta, Maida, Suzi, Bran etc.;

3. Vegetable Oil;

4. Rice milling;

5. Milk and milk products;

6. Tea.

It will, therefore, be appropriate to deal seriatim the grievances centering round the levy of market fee on transactions concerning the aforesaid commodities.

GRIEVANCES IN CONNECTION WITH MARKET FEE CONCERNING SUGAR MATTERS

3. So far as this group of matters is concerned, first two Civil Appeal Nos. 398 and 399 of 1977 arise out of certificates of fitness granted by the High Court of Judicature at Patna under Articles 132(1) and 133(1) of the Constitution of India. The said certificates pertain to a common judgment of the High Court rendered in two writ petitions of two sugar mills located in the State of Bihar. By the common judgment dated 20th April, 1976 the High Court dismissed both the writ petitions. The said judgment of the High Court is reported in The Belsund Sugar Co. Ltd., Riga v. The State of Bihar, AIR 1977 Patna 136. By the impugned common judgment, the imposition of market fee under the Market Act on the transactions of purchase of sugarcane by the sugar mills concerned and also on their transactions covering sale of sugar and molasses manufactured by utilising the purchased sugarcane was upheld by the High Court.

4. In view of the fact that the certificates of fitness were granted by the High Court as aforesaid this group of matters was directed to be placed before a Constitution Bench of this Court as per Article 145 of the Constitution of India. Though initially they were directed to be placed before a Bench of seven Judges, subsequently by a latter order dated 9th December, 1998, these appeals were directed to be placed before a five-Judge Bench and that is how these appeals and other cognate matters were placed before this Bench for final hearing.

5. Though the certificates of fitness granted by the High Court were on the basis that the cases involved a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of Article 254(1) of the Constitution of India, at the time when these appeals and the cognate matters reached final hearing before us, learned senior counsel Shri Shanti Bhushan and Shri Gupta appearing for the appellants, raised mainly two contentions for our consideration :

1. Whether the Market Act can apply to the transactions of purchase of sugarcane and sale of sugar and molasses by the appellant- sugar mills in view of the fact that regulation of these transactions is already effected by Bihar Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1981 (for short 'Sugarcane Act') as well as by the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 and Sugar (Control) Order, 1966 both issued under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Essential Commodities Act') and also under the provisions of Bihar Molasses (Control) Act, 1947.

2. In the alternative, whether imposition of market fee under the Market Act by the respective market committees is justified in the absence of any service rendered to the appellant-sugar mills under the provisions of the Market Act and consequently the levy of market fee can be said to be not supported by any quid pro quo.

RIVAL CONTENTIONS :

6. Learned senior counsel for the appellants vehemently submitted in support of the aforesaid twin contentions that the Market Act which was enacted by the Bihar Legislature under Entries 26 and 27 of the State List read with Entry 28 therein had to be read subject to Entry 33 of the Concurrent List and as the Bihar Legislature itself had enacted the Sugar Act in exercise of its legislative powers under Entry 33 of the Concurrent List, there was no occasion left for the State of Bihar to get satisfied about the need to regulate the production and sale of sugarcane as well as manufactured items therefrom as per the Market Act. In short, the invocation of Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Market Act was totally misconceived and uncalled for. It was further contended that once the State of Bihar in exercise of its power of exemption under Section 42 of the Market Act had exempted the appellant-sugar factories from applicability of Section 18 of the Market Act, the entire machinery under the Market Act became inapplicable to regulate the sale and purchase of transactions concerning sugarcane, sugar and molasses as entered into by the appellant-sugar factories. Consequently, there remained no occasion for the authorities functioning under the Market Act for demanding any market fee from the appellants under Section 27 of the Market Act. It was also contended in further support of this submission that the Sugarcane Control Order, 1966 as well as the Sugar (Control) Order of the same year issued under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and also the provisions of the Bihar Molasses (Control) Act, 1947 fully occupied the field of regulation of sale and purchase of sugarcane, sugar and molasses and on that ground also the provisions of the Market Act could not be pressed in service against the appellant-sugar factories undertaking the purchase and sale of the concerned transactions. In the alternative, it was contended that once Section 15 of the Market Act is out of picture and once it remains an admitted position that the appellant-sugar factories have to purchase sugarcane from purchase centres, there remains no occasion for the market committees to give any services under the Market Act to the appellant-sugar factories. Hence the market committees were not entitled to recover any market fee from the appellants as there was no return benefit or quid pro quo made available to the appellants by the market committees and hence the impugned market fee in substance became a tax which could not be recovered under the Market Act by the market committees.

7. Replying to these contentions, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Bihar and learned senior counsel appearing for the market committees submitted that the appellant-sugar factories have no locus standi to maintain these proceedings for the simple reason that so far as their challenges to the levy of market fee on transactions of sale of sugar and molasses were concerned, as under Section 27 of the Market Act levy was imposed on the buyers of sugar and molasses manufactured by the appellant-companies, these sugar mills were not affected by the levy. That the appellant-companies may at the highest be collecting agents of market fee if the buyers were not licensed under the Act but in most of the cases the appellant-sugar companies were selling levy sugar to the Food Corporation of India and even free sugar was mostly sold by them to licensed buyers. Same was the case of sale of molasses to the concerned buyers. They, however, rightly conceded that the appellants cannot be said to be not having any locus standi to challenge the market fee levied on their purchase of sugarcane as the charge of market fee would be on them as buyers of sugarcane.

8. On the merits of the contentions raised by the learned senior counsel for the appellants, learned senior counsel for the respondents submitted that even if the exemption notification under Section 42 of the Act purports to exempt the appellant-sugar companies from whole of Section 15 of the Market Act, in substance the exemption is confined to Section 15(2) of the Act as there is already a declaration under Section 4 of the Market Act treating the purchase centres of the appellant-sugar companies at the factory gates as well as at other places in the market area as sub-market yards. On a conjoint reading of these two notifications, therefore, it can be seen that exemption under Section 42 of the Act was confined to excluding the operation of Section 15(2) of the Act qua these sugar factories. In the alternative, it was submitted that if the exemption notification is treated to cover entire Section 15 even then once the transactions of sale and purchase take place within the market area, charge under Section 27 would get settled on these transactions. It was further submitted that there is enough return benefit made available to the sugar factories admittedly situated within the market area. That, in fact, their service centres are also declared to be sub-market yards even beyond the factory gate. That they utilise the link roads made available by the market committee for bringing sugarcane produce to the factory premises by giving facility of swift transportation. Thus the sugarcane as a raw material is brought to the factory premises before it gets dried up. This yields better quality and larger quantity of sugar and molasses. In addition thereto facilities of supply of necessary information regarding the prevalent prices of sugarcane are made available by the market committee. But even apart from that, the market committee can act as a mediator in enabling the sugarcane growers to get better price of sugarcane above the minimum price fixed under the Control Order and the Sugarcane Act and this role of the market committee would be beneficial not only to the producers of sugarcane but also to the factories which can be assured of appropriate good quality sugarcane purchased from the sugarcane growers. It is, therefore, wrong to suggest that there is no quid pro quo between the charge of market fee and the payment thereof by the sugarcane factories, that the infrastructural facilities made available to the industry as a whole have to be seen and transactions are not to be dissected for finding out the quid pro quo between charging of the market fee and the burden thereof borne by the sugar companies. It was, therefore, contended that none of the submissions canvassed by learned senior counsel for the appellants deserved to be accepted.

9. In the light of the aforesaid rival contentions, we now proceed to deal with the twin contentions submitted for our consideration by learned senior counsel for the appellants in support of these appeals. However, before we deal with the merits of these contentions, the question of locus standi of the appellants is required to be considerd at the outset.

LOCUS STANDI OF THE APPELLANTS TO MAINTAIN THESE PROCEEDINGS :

10. It has to be kept in view that as per Section 27 of the Market Act the charge of the market fee is on the buyer of the agricultural produce bought or sold in the market area. The said section reads as under :

Power to levy fees

xxxx xxxx xxxx

(2) The market fee chargeable under sub-section (1) shall be payable by the buyer, in the manner prescribed.

(3) The fee chargeable under sub-section (1) shall not be levied more than once on a notified agricultural produce in the same notified Market Area."

11. It is not in dispute between the parties that sugarcane is an 'agricultural produce' as it is grown in fields by the cultivators. Both sugarcane and sugar are listed as Item Nos. 1 and 3 in Para XII dealing with miscellaneous items as found in the Schedule to the Market Act enacted as per Section 2(1)(a) of the Act.

Section 2(1)(a) of the Act defines 'agricultural produce' as under :

"'Agricultural produce' means all produce whether processed or non-processed, manufactured or not, of Agriculture, Horticulture, Plantation, Animal Husbandry, Forest, Sericulture, Pisciculture, and includes livestock or poultry as specified in the Schedule."

12. In the light of the aforesaid provisions, it is obvious that the sugar factories operating in the market area within the jurisdiction of the market committee concerned can be said to be buyers of sugarcane, an 'agricultural produce'. Their purchase centres are situated within the market area. As submitted by learned senior counsel for the respondents, all the purchase centres at which the appellant-sugar factories purchase sugarcane as raw material are not only situated within the market area but are also declared as sub-market yards. In fact the entire Bihar State is comprised of various market areas within the jurisdiction of different market committees. If that is so, it has to be held that when the charge under Section 27 of paying market fee is imposed on the sugar factories as buyers of sugarcane within the market area, they have to be treated to be having sufficient locus standias buyers of sugarcane to challenge the imposition of market fee on their purchase transactions. On this aspect, learned senior counsel for the respondents did not contest. However, their submission was that when purchased sugarcane is processed at the factories and converted into sugar and molasses and when such sugar and molasses are sold by the sugar factories, the charge of market fee on these sale transactions would settle on the buyers of sugar and molasses who have not made any grievance about payment of market fee. That may be so, however, the fact remains that if the sugar factories sell manufactured sugar and molasses out of the purchased raw material-sugarcane, and if the buyers are not licensed then as per the provisions of Rule 82(iii) of the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Rules, 1975 the sugar factories as sellers have to realise the market fee from the buyers and have to deposit the same with the market committees. That obligation by itself would give sufficient locus standito the sugar factories which sell sugar and molasses within the market area to challenge the aforesaid statutory obligation imposed on them by the Act and the Rules and to submit as to how they are not covered by the provisions of the Act. It may be that when they sell levy sugar to the Food Corporation of India, they may not have to undertake this liability as collecting agents of the market committee, so far as the market fee is concerned. Still even if partially in case of sale of free sugar to unlicensed buyers they have to be called upon to discharge their statutory obligation under Rule 82(iii), it cannot be said that they have no locus standito challenged the imposition of market fee on the transactions of sale effected by them in connection with sugar and molasses. The preliminary objection of learned senior counsel for the respondents against the locus standi of the appellants to maintain these proceedings is, therefore, overruled.

13. This takes us to the consideration of the main twin contentions canvassed by learned senior counsel for the appellants for our consideration.

CONTENTION NO. 1 :

Applicability of the Market Act to appellants' transaction of purchase of sugarcane and sale of sugar and molasses.

14. So far as this contention is concerned, we have to keep in view the relevant provisions of the Market Act, Sugar Act as well as the Orders under the Essential Commodities Act.

15. In the first instance, we shall deal with the transactions of purchase of sugarcane by the sugar factories functioning in the market areas falling within the jurisdiction of respective market committees constituted under the Market Act. The Market Act has been enacted by the Bihar Legislature as per the legislative power vested in it by Entries 26, 27 and 28 of List II of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. These Entries read as under :

"26. Trade and commerce within the State subject to the provisions of Entry 33 of List III.

27. Production, supply and distribution of goods subject to the provisions of entry 33 of List III.

28. Markets and fairs."

16. It becomes at once clear that if location of markets and fairs simpliciter and the management and maintenance thereof are only contemplated by the Market Act, then they would fall squarely within the topic of legislative power envisaged by Entry 28 of List II. However, the Market Act, as well will presently show, deal with supply and distribution of goods as well as trade and commerce therein as it seeks to regulate the sale and purchase of agricultural produce to be carried on in the specified markets under the Act. To that extent the provisions of Entry 33 of List III override the legislative powers of the State Legislature in connection with legislations dealing with trade and commerce in, and the production, supply and distribution of goods. Once we turn to Entry 33 of the Concurrent List, we find that on the topic of trade and commerce in, and the production, supply and distribution of, goods enumerated therein at sub-clause (b), we find listed items of foodstuffs, including edible oilseeds and oils. Thus to the extent to which the Market Act seeks to regulate the transactions of sale and purchase of sugarcane and sugar which are foodstuffs and trade and commerce therein, it has to be held that the Market Act being enacted under the topics of legislative powers under Entries 26, 27 and 28 of List II will be subject to any other legislation under Entry 33 of the Concurrent List. As it will be seen hereinafter, the Bihar Legislature itself has enacted the Sugarcane Act in exercise of its legislative powers under Entry 33 of the Concurrent List and, therefore, the field covered by the Sugarcane Act would obviously remain exclusively governed by the Sugarcane Act and to the extent the latter Act carves out an independent field for its operation, the sweep of the general field covered by the Market Act which covers all types of agricultural produce, would pro tanto get excluded qua sugarcane and the products prepared out of it.

17. So far as the Market Act is concerned, it is necessary to note that it is an Act to pro-vide for better regulation of buying and selling of agricultural produce and the establishment of markets for agricultural produce in the State of Bihar and for matters connected therewith. The said Act is enacted essentially to protect the growers of agricultural produce in the State who on account of their ignorance, illiteracy and lack of collective bargaining power may get exploited by middlemen and economically strong purchasers of their agricultural produce with the result that the agriculturists may not get adequate price for their produce. It is with that end in view that the Market Act has been enacted. The constitutional validity of the Madras Commercial Crops Markets Act, concerned with the regulation of purchase and sale of commercial crops grown by agriculturists was considered by a Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of M.C.V.S. Arunachala Nadar v. The State of Madras, 1959 Supp (1) SCR 92. Subba Rao J., speaking for the Court while upholding the constitutional validity of the said Act emphasised the necessity of such enactment with a view to protect the producers of commercial crops from being exploited by the middlemen and profiteers and to enable them to secure a fair return for their produce. The learned Judge referred to, with approval, the following recommendations of Royal Commission on Agriculture in India appointed in 1928.

"That cultivator suffers from many handi-caps : to begin with he is illiterate and in general ignorant of prevailing prices in the markets, especially in regard to commercial crops. The most hopeful solution of the cultivator's marketing difficulties seems to lie in the improvement of communications and the establishment of regulated markets and we recommend for the consideration of other Provinces the establishment of regulated markets on the Berar system as modified by the Bombay legislation. The establishment of regulated markets must form an essential part of any ordered plan of agricultural development in this country. The Bombay Act is, however, definitely limited to cotton markets and the bulk of the transactions in Berar markets is also in that crop. We consider that the system can conveniently be extended to other crops and, with a view to avoiding difficulties, would suggest that regulated markets should only be established under Provincial legislation."

Reference was also made to the Report of an Expert Committee appointed by the Government of Madras which graphically described the difficulties of the cultivators and their dependence upon the middlemen. The following is the extract from the Report of the Expert Committee as noted by Subba Rao J., for highlighting the need for regulated markets for cultivators of commercial crops.

"The aforesaid observations describe the pitiable dependence of the middle-class and poor ryots on the middlemen and petty traders, with the result that the cultivators are not able to find markets for their produce wherein they can expect reasonable price for them. With a view to provide satisfactory conditions for the growers of commercial crops to sell their produce on equal terms and at reasonable prices, the Act was passed on July 25, 1933. The preamble introduces the Act with the recital that it is expedient to provide for the better regulation of the buying and selling of commercial crops in the Presidency of Madras and for that purpose to establish markets and make rules for their proper administration. The Act, therefore, was the result of a long exploratory investigation by experts in the field, conceived and enacted to regular the buying and selling of commercial crops by providing suitable and regulated markets by eliminating middlemen and bringing face to face the producer and the buyer so that they meet on equal terms, thereby eradicating or at any rate reducing the scope for exploitation in dealings. Such a statute cannot be said to create unreasonable restrictions on the citizens' right to do business unless it is clearly established that the provisions are too drastic, unnecessarily harsh and overreach the scope of the object to achieve which it is enacted."

"3. Notification of intention of exercising control over purchase, sale, storage and processing of agricultural produce in specified area-

[(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other act for the time being in force, the State Government may, by notification, declare its intention of regulating the purchase, sale, storage and processing of such agricultural produce and in such area, as may be specified in the notification.]

(2) A notification under sub-section (1) shall state that any objection or suggestion which may be received by the State Government within a period of not less than two months to be specified in the notification, shall be considered by the State Government."

"(1) The Board shall advise the State Government on the following matters, namely :-

(a) planning of development schemes connected with production, research, transport and sale of sugarcane;

(b) matters pertaining to regulation of supply, purchase and weighment of cane;

(c) the varieties of sugarcane, tested by the Sugarcane Research Institute in the State, which are suitable or unsuitable for use in a factory;

(d) recommendations in respect of the price of cane to be supplied to factories;

(e) determination of the price of cane payable by owners of units;

(f) maintenance of healthy relations between the occupiers and managers of factories on the one hand and the cane-growers and co-operative societies on the other; and

(g) such other matters as may be prescribed."

"(a) to consider and prepare the programme for the development of communications, irrigations, soil analysis and other agricultural facilities relating to sugarcane;

(b) to devise ways and means for executing development plan in all its essential including improvement and development of communications, cane varieties, supply of good quality seeds, fetilisers and manures, plant protection and prevention and control of diseases and pests;

(d) to assist in arrangements for the training of cultivators in improved methods of sugarcane cultivation; and

(e) to perform such other functions pertaining and conducive to the general development of the reserved area as may be prescribed."

"(1) The State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, appoint any person to be the Cane Commissioner for the State of Bihar and to exercise the powers and perform the duties conferred and imposed on the Cane Commissioner by or under this Act.

(2) The State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, appoint such persons as it thinks fit to be the Additional Cane Commissioner, Joint Cane Commissioner, Deputy Cane Commissioner and Assistant Cane Commissioner to assist the Cane Commissioner within such local limits as may be assigned to them and confer and impose upon them all or any of the powers and duties of the Cane Commissioner within their respective jurisdiction."

"(1) Within thirty days of the commencement of this Act and thereafter within the same period before the commencement of every crushing year the occupier of a factory shall send to the Collector a notice of appointment of any person as manager for the purposes of this Act or the rules;

Provided that until the first notice of appointment of manager under this Act is sent, the person appointed or deemed to be appointed as manager under the Bihar Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Ordinance, 1973 (Bihar Ordinance 47 of 1973) shall be deemed to be a manager under this Act.

(2) No person shall be deemed to have been appointed as manager until a sum of two thousand and five hundred rupees is deposited by him or on his behalf as security, with the Collector concerned in the prescribed manner.

(3) Whenever a new manager is appointed, the occupier of the factory shall send to the Collector a written notice of the change within fifteen days of the date on which the new manager assumes charge of his work.

(4) During any period for which provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) are not complied with or the person appointed as manager does not manage the factory, or his security money is not replenished to the extent of its forfeiture under sub-section (2) of Section 57, the occupier of the factory himself shall be deemed to be the manager of the factory for the purposes of this Act and the rules."

"(1) The occupier of every factory shall submit to the Cane Commissioner, on or before the prescribed date, in every crushing year, an estimate, in the prescribed manner, of the quantity of cane which may be required in the factory during such crushing year.

(2) The Cane Commissioner shall examine every estimate submitted under sub-section (1) and where the occupier of a factory has failed to submit an estimate under sub-section (1), he shall draw up an estimate by himself in the prescribed manner and shall publish the same in such manner as may be prescribed with such modifications, if any, as he may think fit, after consultation with the council concerned.

(3) The prescribed authority may, either suo motu or on an application made to it by the occupier of the factory, within thirty days of the publication of the estimate under sub-section (2), revise the estimate, published under that sub-section and that authority shall cause the estimate so revised to be published in the prescribed manner."

"(1) The occupier of a factory or any person acting on his behalf shall not commence the purchase of cane unless adequate arrangements, as may be prescribed, have been made in respect of the following matters, namely :-

(a) weighment of cane to be purchased;

(b) payment of the price of cane purchased;

(d) approach roads to the place of weighment; and

(e) distribution of requisition slips.

(2) Where survey has not been made under Section 34, the occupier of the factory shall, before the commencement of purchase of cane, have the survey of the standing cane-crop made as the prescribed manner."

"(1) The occupier of a factory, or the Secretary of a Co-operative Society may establish a purchasing centre after giving a notice in writing to the Collector at least thirty days before the commencement of purchase of cane and copies of such notice shall be sent by the occupier of the factory or the Secretary of the Society forthwith to the Cane Officer concerned and the Cane Commissioner. . . ."

"(1) The Cane Commissioner may, having regard to the crushing capacity of the factory, the availability of sugarcane in such area and the need for production of sugar and after consulting the council concerned and the occupier of the factory or the occupiers of other affected factories and after considering any objection that may be raised, issue an order, by notification in the official Gazette, declaring any area to be the reserved area for the purpose of supply of cane to the factory during a particular crushing year or years and may likewise cancel any such order or alter the extent of the area so reser-ved :

xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx"

"Except with the permission of the State Government, cane grown in a reserved area shall not be sold to or purchased by-

(i) the occupier of any factory other than the factory for which the area is reserved; or

(ii) any person for the purpose of supply to any factory other than the factory for which the area is reserved; or

(iii) the owner of a unit to whom a licence has not been granted under Section 16."

"Subject to the provisions of sub-section (1), the State Government may prohibit or restrict or otherwise regulate the movement of sugarcane from any reserved area except under and in accordance with a permit issued by it in this behalf."

"(1) The occupier of every factory, the owner of every unit, Secretary of every Co-operative Society and every person in charge of weighmen's shall maintain, subject to such limits of error as is prescribed by the State Government under the law relating to weights and measures, for the time being in force, a record of the correct weight of cane purchased at the place of weighment.

(2) No cane shall be purchased without being weighed."

"The occupier of a factory or a co-operative society purchasing cane at any purchasing centre shall make such provisions for the following and keep them in such repairs as may be prescribed, namely :-

(a) approach road and parking space for animal-driven carts;

(b) sheds for animals and cart-drivers;

(d) drinking water and water-trough for animals."

"The State Government may, after consulting the Board, determine by notification in the official Gazette, in respect of any area the minimum price of cane payable by the owners of units to the cane-growers or co-operative societies for cane supplied to them in the crushing year concerned :

Provided that the minimum price so determined shall not exceed the minimum price payable by the occupier of a factory under any law for the time being in force, in respect of the cane supplied from the same area."

"(1) The occupier of a factory or any person on his behalf shall not make any other deductions from the price of cane except the deduction on account of any loan advanced by him, or on his guarantee or otherwise advanced by a bank or other institutions under Section 50(1)".

"(1) If any dispute arises regarding the price of cane supplied to the occupier of a factory the person entitled to the price or the document on the basis of which the price is claimed, payment of the price shall be withheld and the occupier of the factory to which the cane was supplied shall enter the dispute in a register in the prescribed form and refer it within the prescribed period to the prescribed authority who shall, after giving the parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard and after such inquiry as he may consider necessary, decide the dispute :

Provided that whenever the payment of the price is whether held under this sub-section, the occupier of the factory shall deposit with the prescribed authority in the prescribed manner the amount in dispute, within one week of such reference.

(2) Any other dispute touching an agreement for purchase of cane by the occupier of a factory or its supply to him and any dispute relating to purchase of cane or cane-juice by the owner of a unit and payment of price thereof shall be referred to the authority prescribed under sub-section (1) who shall decide it in the manner laid down in that sub-section.

xxxx xxxx xxxx

(3) Any person aggrived by a decision made under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) may, within thirty days of the decision, prefer an appeal to the Collector who shall, after giving the parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard and after such inquiry as he may consider necessary, pass such order, as he thinks fit.

(4) An order of the Collector under sub-section (3) and subject to such order, the decision of the prescribed authority under sub-sections (1) or sub-section (2) shall be final.

"(1) The State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, require the occupier of a factory to pay in the prescribed manner a commission not exceeding fifteen paise per quintal on the purchase of cane made by him or on his behalf and may, by a like notification exempt the occupier of any new factory to be specified in the notification, from the payment of such commission for prescribed period.

xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx"

"(1) The State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, impose-

(a) a tax not exceeding one rupee per quintal on entry of sugarcane into a local area specified in such notification, for consumption or use of, or sale to a factory situated therein :

(b) a tax not exceeding one rupee per quintal on the purchase of sugarcane by or on behalf of the occupier of a factory :

xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx"

"(1) The occupier of a factory or any person working on his behalf or any bank may advance loan to a cane-grower or a Co-operative Society for such purposes connected with cultivation or supply of cane to the extent of the amount and in the manner as may be prescribed.

(2) Interest at the rate specified in Section 51 shall be payable on the loan advanced under sub-section (1) and the loan and the interest shall be realisable in the prescribed manner."

"If any person contravenes or attempts to contravene or abets the contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or the rules or of any order made or direction given thereunder or the terms and conditions of any licence, he shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees or with both and in the case of a continuing contravention, with an additional fine which may extend to one thousand rupees for every day during which such contravention continues after conviction for the first contravention :

xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx"

"For the purposes of enquiries under this Act the Cane Commissioner or any person exercising the powers of the Cane Commissioner or a Cane Officer or an Officer appointed under Section 34 shall have the same powers to summon and enforce the attendance of witnesses and parties and to examine them on oath and to compel the production of document as a civil Court under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (5 of 1908) :

Provided that for the purpose of any penalty under the provision of the said Code upon any defaulter, a reference shall be made to the civil Court of competent jurisdiction for appropriate action."

"(a) all the weighbridges to be used for weighment of cane have duly been checked and certified as workable by the competent authority under the law relating to weights and measures;

(b) appropriate arrangements to the satisfaction of the Collector have been made for arranging funds for making payment of the price of cane;

(c) Cane Officer of the area concerned has certified that suitable arrangements for parking of cane carts and approach roads, as specified in Rule 30 and for distribution of requisition slips and identification cards have been made; and

(d) adequate arrangements for weighment, adequate staff, sufficient number of weighbridges and adequate means of transport for carrying cane for all outlying purchasing centres to the factory, to the satisfaction of the Collector, have been made."

(a) provide at every purchasing centre suitable approach roads connecting the nearest public roads with the parking ground and likewise suitable tracks from the parking ground to the point where cane is unloaded after weighment;

(b) keep such roads and tracks repaired and satisfactorily workable at all times the purchasing centre is in operation;

(c) provide space in the parking ground for accommodating at least one-fourth of the maximum number of animal-driven carts carrying cane required to be brought to the purchasing centre on any day for weighment and purchase;

(d) keep the metalled tracks neat and clean and separated by railing or trenches;

(e) provide shelters for animals and cart-drivers at every purchasing centre, to the satisfaction of the Collector;

(f) provide at least four water taps or hand pumps at convenient points of each purchasing centre located at or adjoining factory premises (referred to hereinafter as mill gate purchasing centre) and one such water tap or hand pump at every purchasing centre other than the mill gate purchasing centre (referred hereinafter as the outstation purchasing centre),

(g) provide adequate number of water troughs in each parking yard to be located at such points as may be determined by the Cane Officer concerned, and;

(h) provide such other facilities at any purchasing centre as may be specified in the directions of the Cane Commissioner issued from time to time.

xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx"

15. Sale of agricultural produce

(2) The sale and purchase of such agricultural produce in such areas shall notwithstanding anything contained in any law be made by means of open auction or tender system except in cases of such class or description of produce as may be exempted by the Board.]"

"S. O. 550 the 22nd March, 1976 (Published in Bihar Gazette (ex-order) dated 23-3-1976). In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 42 of the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960, the Governor of Bihar is pleased to exempt all sugar mills from the provisions of Section 15 of the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960 with regard to their sale and purchase of agricultural produce notified under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the said Act)"

"market" means a market established under this Act for the market area and includes, a principal market yard and sub-market yard or yards, if any."

" "factory" means any premises including the precincts thereto in any part of which sugar is manufactured by vacuum pan process."

" "price" means the price or the minimum price fixed by the Central Government from time to time for sugarcane delivered."

Vasavi Traders v. State of Karnataka, (1982) 2 Kant LJ 357.

"Whether the 'Act' as amended by Act 17 of 1980 in so far it provides for regulation of marketing of sugarcane is unconstitutional, as its marketing is regulated by the provisions of the Central Act, viz., The Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and the Sugarcane (Control) Order made thereunder ?"

"....... It appears to us that the Sugarcane (Control) Order regulates every aspect of marketing of sugarcane and its provisions are irreconcilable with the provisions relating to the marketing under the 'Act'. For instance, the place of delivery, the price, the manner of its payments are all fixed by the statutory order. The same aspects of marketing are sought to be regulated by the Act. The two sets of provisions collide. Section 6 of the Essential Commodities Act gives overriding effect to the orders made under Section 3 of that Act as against any other Law. The small portion of the sugarcane grown by the grower the sale of which is left regulated under the statutory Order is again a matter - and part - of the policy of the regulation itself."

I.T.C. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, 1985 (Suppl) SCC 476.

Jugal Kishore v. State of Maharashtra, 1989 Suppl (1) SCC 589

"Unless the Acts, with the intention of implementing various socio-economic plans, are read in such complementary manner, the operation of the different Acts in the same field would create contradiction and would become impossible. It is, therefore, necessary to take a constructive attitude in interpreting provisions of these types and determine the main aim of the particular Act in question for adjudication before the Court."

S. Satyapal Reddy v. Government of A.P., (1994) 4 SCC 391

2. SALE OF SUGAR AND MOLASSES :

1. Sugar (Control) Order, 1966;

2. Sugar (Packing and Marking) Order, 1970;

3. Sugar (Restriction on Movement) Order, 1970;

4. Levy Sugar Supply (Control) Order, 1979.

SALE OF MOLASSES :

"An Act to provide for the control of the distribution, supply, storage and price of molasses produced by factories in the State of Bihar."

" 'Molasses' means final residual by-product of factories manufacturing sugar from cane or by refining gur, by means of vacuum pans but does not include convertible molasses, which are the final residual by-product of sugar factories operating on the open pan system."

Submission of returns by occupiers of factories and stockists

"No molasses produced in the State nor any molasses held by the stockists in this State, shall, without the permission of the Controller, be moved by rail, road or river from any place in the State to any other place therein."

(a) prescribe the specifications and tests in respect of the purity of molasses;

(b) regulate sale and price of molasses intended for use in distilleries or for other purposes;

(d) prescribe the forms and returns to be submitted, and the records and books to be maintained, by factories;

(e) prescribe the manner in which molasses produced in factories shall be graded, marketed, packed or stores for sale;

(f) regulate imposition and recovery of permit fee and administrative charges on released molasses;

(ff) prescribe the manner in which accounts of funds for regulation of adequate storage facilities in respect of molasses produced in factories shall be maintained and operated;

(g) any other matter which is required to be or which may be prescribed under this Act."

"Every sugar factory and every stockist shall, on receipt of an order from the Controller and on intimation of the allotment of tank wagons for the transport of molasses, make all necessary arrangements promptly for the haulage and loading of molasses and where the owner, occupier or Manager of a sugar factory or the stockist fails to make such arrangements without sufficient reason, the Excise Officer shall have the power on this behalf, to enter upon the premises, make arrangement for the haulage and loading of molasses by manual labour, if necessary recover the cost incurred thereby from the said owner, occupier or manager of the sugar factory or the stockist."

SIEL Ltd. v. Union of India, (1998) 7 SCC 26 : 1998 All LJ 2239).

CONTENTION NO. 2 :

Kewal Krishan Puri v. State of Punjab, (1980) 1 SCC 416

(1) That the amount of fee realised must be earmarked for rendering services to the licensees in the notified market area and a good and substantial portion of it must be shown to be expended for this purpose.

(2) That the services rendered to the licensees must be in relation to the transaction of purchase or sale of the agricultural produce.

(3) That while rendering services in the market area for the purposes of facilitating the transactions of purchase and sale with a view to achieve the objects of the marketing legislation it is not necessary to confer the whole of the benefit on the licensees but some special benefits must be conferred on them which have a direct, close and reasonable correlation between the licensees and the transactions.

(4) That while conferring some special benefits on the licensees it is permissible to render such service in the market which may be in the general interest of all concerned with the transactions taking place in the market.

(5) That spending the amount of market fees for the purpose of augmenting the agricultural produce, its facility of transport in villages and to provide other facilities meant mainly or exclusively for the benefit of the agriculturists is not permissible on the ground that such services in the long run go to increase the volume of transactions in the market ultimately benefiting the traders also. Such an indirect and remote benefit to the traders is in no sense a special benefit to them.

(6) That the element of quid pro quo may not be possible, or even necessary, to be established with arithmetical exactitude but even broadly and reasonably it must be established by the authorities who charge the fees that the amount is being spent for rendering services to those on whom falls the burden of the fee.

(7) At least a good and substantial portion of the amount collected on account of fees, may be in the neighbourhood of two thirds or three-fourths, must be shown with reasonable certainty as being spent for rendering services of the kind mentioned above."

1. Link road facilities by which market committees were to spend monies for connecting villages in the market area which the main roads for facilitating the movement of agricultural produce including the sugarcane from the farms to the purchase centres of the factories.

2. Spread of information regarding prices of agricultural produce for information of growers of sugarcane.

3. Providing mediation facility to enable the growers of sugarcane to get higher price for sugarcane as compared to the minimum prices fixed under the control orders.

4. Supervision of weighment of sugarcane.

5. Licensing of weighing inspectors.

6. Providing for drinking facility and park.

7. Parking facilities at the purchase centres.

WHEAT PRODUCTS : ATTA, MAIDA, SUZI, BRAN ETC.

1. Under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 (for short 'I.D.R. Act') in public interest the Union of India has taken over the control of the wheat industry as specified in the First Schedule to the Act and consequently any transaction of purchase and sale of the products of that industry cannot be regulated by the State Act like the Market Act. As a part of the very same contention, it was submitted that Wheat Rolling Flour Mills (Licensing and Control) Order, 1957 and the Bihar Trading Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984 issued under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 lay down a complete scheme for regulating purchase and sale of wheat products and hence these transactions cannot be covered by the general sweep of the Market Act.

2. Alternatively, it was contended that wheat may be an agricultural produce, but sale of atta, maida, suzi cannot be treated as agricultural produce.

Point No. 1 :

18G. Power to control, supply, distribution, price, etc., of certain articles

The Hingir-Rampur Coal Co. Ltd. v. The State of Orissa (1961) 2 SCR 537, at page 558

". . . . . . . . . . . . . . Entry 54 in List I dealing with "Regulation of mines and mineral development to the extent to which such regulation and development under the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest". The effect of reading the two Entries together is clear. The jurisdiction of the State Legislature under Entry 23 is subject to the limitation imposed by the latter part of the said Entry. If Parliament by its law has declared that regulation and development of mines should in public interest be under the control of the Union, to the extent of such declaration the jurisdiction of the State Legislature is excluded. . . . . . . . . . . . . ."

Point No. 2 :

VEGETABLE OILS :

RICE MILLING INDUSTRIES :

"Any owner of an existing rice mill or of a rice mill in respect of which a permit has been granted under Section 5 may make an application to the licensing officer for the grant of a licence for carrying on rice milling operation in the rice mill."

MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS

"LACTODEX"
	Per 100 ml. When reconstituted
	6g.	: 45ml.
Protein	1.9	g.
Carbohydrate	9.6	g.
Milk fat	0.9	g.
Minerals	0.5	g.
Vitamin-A	265	I.U.
Vitamin B-6	40	mcg. Including that derived from milk powder
Vitamin-D	40	I.U.
Calories	54

"RAPTAKOS S.I.F
	Per 100 ml. When reconstituted
	4.5g.	: 30ml.
Protein	1.8	g.
Fats	3.0	g.
Carbohydrate	9.6	g.
Minerals(Ash)	0.4	g.
Iron	0.6	g.
Vitamin-A	225	I.U.
Vitamin-D	60	I.U.
Vitamin-E	1.3	I.U
Vitamin-B1	0.07	mg.
Vitamin-B2	0.11	mg.
Nicotinamide	0.9	mg.
Vitamin-B6	0.04	mg.
Vitamin-B12	0.15	mg.
Vitamin-C	0.5	mg.
Calories	73	mg.

TEA MATTERS

CONTENTION NO. 1 :

CONTENTION NO. 2 :

CONTENTION NO. 3 :

1. Whether the basic agricultural produce i.e. 'tea leaves' which is subjected to manufacturing process outside the Bihar State and is imported and sold in manufactured condition as packed tea within the Bihar State in the market areas concerned, attracts the provisions of the Market Act for regulating such transactions of sale.

2. Whether the Tea Act of 1953 and the relevant orders promulgated thereunder fully occupy the field regarding regulation of purchase and sale of tea and, consequently, the Market Act, being a general Act, would get excluded for regulating the transactions of sale of manufactured tea in Bihar State and

3. Whether there is adequate quid pro quo supporting the levy of market fee on such transactions of sale of manufactured and packed blended tea in markets governed by the Market Act.

POINT NO. 1 :

Ram Chandra Kailash Kumar and Company v. State of U.P., 1980 (Supp) SCC 27

"No market fee could be levied on goods not produced within the limits of a particular market area and if produced outside and brought in such area."

"Fee can be charged only on those transactions in which the seller is producer and not on any other transaction." Repelling these contentions, the Constitution Bench held that market fee could be levied on transactions of sale of goods even though such goods are produced outside the State of Uttar Pradesh or outside the market area of that particular market committee, provided the transactions of sale take place within the limits of that market area. It was also held that, on the other hand, there was no provision in the Act or the Rules to limit the operation of the law in a particular market area only in respect of the agricultural produce produced in that area.

Rameshchandra Kachardas Porwal v. State of Maharashtra (1981) 2 SCC 722

". . . . . . . .The basic assumption of the submission was that the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act was conceived in the interests of the agriculturists only and intended for their sole benefit. This basic assumption is not well founded.

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

It is also clear to our mind that the regulation of marketing of agricultural produce, if confined to the sales by producers within the market area to traders, will very soon lead to its circumvention in the guise of sales by traders to traders or import of agricultural produce from outside the market area to within the market area. . . . . . . . ."

Rathi Khandsari Udyog v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1985) 2 SCC 485

"The legislature, it is also argued, 'could not have intended' to cover the produce turned out by producers like the petitioners.

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

While this is one of the objects of the Act, it is not the sole or only object of the Act. The Act has many more objects and a much wider perspective such as development of new market areas, efficient collection of data, and processing of arrivals in Mandis with a view to enable the World Bank to give substantial economic assistance to establish various markets in Uttar Pradesh, as also protection of consumers and even traders from being exploited in the matter of quality, weight and price. . . . . . . . ."

POINT NO. 2 :

(a) owners of tea estate and gardens and growers of tea;

(b) persons employed in tea estates and gardens;

(d) dealers including both exporters and internal traders of tea;

(e) consumers;

(f) Parliament;

(g) the Government of the principal tea growing States.

"(1) It shall be the duty of the Board to promote, by such measures as it thinks fit, the development under the control of the Central Government of the tea industry.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of sub-section (1), the measures referred to therein may provide for-

(a) regulating the production and extent of cultivation of tea;

(b) improving the quality of tea;

(d) undertaking, assisting or encouraging scientific, technological and economic research and maintaining or assisting in the maintenance of demonstration farms and manufacturing stations;

(e) assisting in the control of insects and other pests and diseases affecting tea;

(f) regulating the sale and export of tea;

(g) training in tea testing and fixing grade standards of tea;

(h) increasing the consumption in India and elsewhere of tea and carrying on propaganda for that purpose;

(i) registering and licensing of manufacturers, brokers, tea waste dealers and persons engaged in the business of blending tea;

(j) improving the marketing of tea in India and elsewhere;

(k) xxxx xxx xxx xxxx"

Power to control price and distribution of tea or tea waste

(a) the maximum price or the minimum price or the maximum and minimum prices which may be charged by a grower of tea, manufacturer or dealer, wholesale or retail, whether for the Indian market or for export;

(b) the maximum quantity which may in one transaction be sold to any person."

"(a) prohibit the disposal of tea or tea waste except in such circumstances and under such conditions as may be specified in the order;

(b) direct any person growing, manufacturing or holding in stock tea or tea waste to sell the whole or a part of such tea or tea waste so grown or manufactured during any specified period, or to sell the whole or a part of the tea or tea waste so held in stock, to such person or class of persons and in such circumstances as may be specified in the order."

"Whether in pursuance of any order made with reference to Clause (b) of sub-section (3), any person sells the whole or a part of any quantity of tea or tea waste, there shall be paid to him as price therefor-

(a) where the price can be fixed by agreement consistently with the order, if any, relating to the fixation of price issued under sub-section (1), the price so agreed upon;

(b) x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x"

Ch. Tika Ramji v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1956 SCR 393.

Shyamakant Lal v. Rambhajan Singh, 1939 FCR 193, 212

Attorney-General for Ontario v. Attorney-General for the Dominion (1896 ACt 348)"

"In the instant case, there is no question of any inconsistency in the actual terms of the Acts enacted by Parliament and the impugned Act. The only questions that arise are whether Parliament and the State Legislature sought to exercise their powers over the same subject-matter or whether the laws enacted by Parliament were intended to be a complete exhaustive Code or, in other words, expressly or impliedly evinced an intention to cover the whole field."

"Even assuming that sugarcane was an article or class of articles relatable to the sugar industry within the meaning of Section 18G of the LXV of 1951, it is to be noted that no order was issued by the Central Government in exercise of the powers vested in it under that section and no question of repugnancy could ever arise because, as he has noted above, repugnancy must exist in fact and not depend merely on a possibility. The possibility of an order u/Section 18-G being issued by the Central Government would not be enough. The existence of such an order would be the essential pre-requisite before any repugnancy could ever arise."

Point No. 3 :

"(i) the acquisition of a site or site for the market;

(ii) the maintenance and improvement of the market;

(iii) the provision and maintenance of standard weights,

(iv) the construction and repair of buildings [check posts, market gates and other fixtures] necessary for the purpose of such market and for the health, convenience and safety of the persons using it;

(v) xx xx xx xx xx

(vi) xx xx xx xx xx

(vii) xx xx xx xx xx

(viii) The construction, repair and maintenance of means of communication which are useful for the purposes of [regulation, control and] development of a market or for the convenience and safety of the persons using it;

(viii-a) link roads connecting the main road from the villages in the Market Area of the concerned market committee shall be constructed on priority basis from the Development Fund to facilitate the farmers to go and from the villages;]

(ix) the planting and rearing of trees, and making arrangements for providing to the persons and cattle coming to a market and like purposes;

(x) xx xx xx xx xx

(xi) xx xx xx xx xx

(xii) xx xx xx xx xxx"

FINAL ORDER :

1. SUGAR GROUP MATTERS :

WHEAT PRODUCTS LIKE ATTA, MAIDA, SUZI, ETC. :

VEGETABLE OIL MATTERS ;

RICE MILLING INDUSTRY :

MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS :

TEA MATTER :