Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
STATE OF U.P. & ORS. ETC.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SRI LAXMAN RICE MILLS & ORS. ETC.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/01/1997
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIR AHMAD
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 447-449 OF 1997
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 17287,19671 and 17355/96
O R D E R
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel on both sides.
These appeals by special leave arise from various
orders of the Division bench of the Allahabad High Court,
made on February 27,1996 etc. in writ Petition No. 31392/95
etc.
The only controversy is; whether the existing stock of
rice on the intervening night of 30th September and 1st
October 1995 was liable to levy under the U.P. Rice and
Paddy (Levy and Regulation of Trade) Order, 1985. Exercising
the power under Section 3 of the Essential commodities Act,
with the concurrence of the Central Government, the
appellant had issued the said order imposing levy on rice
effective from the intervening night of September 30,1995
and October 1, 1995. This is in furtherance of clause (3) of
the Levy Order. It is contended by the learned counsel for
the appellant that since the levy was effective from the
aforesaid period within the areas specified under the order,
all the rice mills covered are subject to the above
notification. The High Court was not right in directing that
the Order will be effective from October 1,1995 and that the
direction that the existing stock as on the intervening
night of the said dates is not liable to levy is vitiated by
error of law. We find no force in the contention.
Clause 24 of the Order gives power to exempt as under:
"(1) With the concurrence of the
Central Government, the State
Government may--
(a) in the public interest increase
or reduce the percentage of levy;
(b) in the public interest exempt
any area from levy or reduce per
cent;
(c) in the public interest reduce
the percentage of levy from any
type of rice mill in any area;
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
(d) exempt wholly or partly from
levy and variety of paddy and
rice."
It is seen that the proceedings dated May 31, 1996 the
Principal Secretary to the Government had conveyed to all
the authorities concerned the decision of the Government,
namely, " I am directed to say that levy is lifted in U.P.
from rice for rest of the Kharif 1994-95 till 30.9.1995 with
immediate effect."
Thus, it would be seen that the rice stock existing
with rice millers as on September 30,1995, in other words,
all purchases made/rice produced by the rice millers upto
that date, i.e., September 30,1995 stood exempted. While
issuing the levy order, the exemption order was not
withdrawn. Consequently levy order issued in exercise of
clause (3) of the Order for the kharif Season 1995-96
effective from midnight of September 30,1995 including the
stock on hand as on that date, is not legal for the stock on
hand as on that date, is not legal for the limited stock on
hand, namely, the stock existing with the rice millers as
on the intervening night of September 30,1995 and October
1,1995. To that extent only the exemption would operate and
the levy order would become effective in respect of all
purchases made/rice produced on and from the day break of
October 1, 1995.
The appeals are accordingly dispose of No costs.