CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(1995) 09 P&H CK 0043

The Batala Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. vs The Union of India (UOI) and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 13 September 1995 · Citation: (1996) 112 PLR 403

HON’BLE JUDGES
G.S. Singhvi, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 2126 of 1991

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 357 words

G.S. Singhvi, J.

1 These petitions involve a challenge to the Sugar (Price Determination for 1980-81 Production) Order 1980. The petitioners have prayed for quashing of this order and for issue of a direction to the respondent No. 1 to refix the price of levy sugar keeping in view the law laid down by the Supreme Court and the reports of the various Commissions.

2.

In its reply respondent No. 7 has pleaded that the impugned levy is legal and justified.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to the decision of the Delhi High Court in Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. Joint Secretary (Sugar), Govt. of India and Others, and argued that in view of the decision of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court accepting the challenge to the Sugar (Price Determination for 1990-91 Production) Order, 1980, the petitioners should be given similar relief. Learned counsel for the respondents did not dispute that a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has held that the determination of price made by Order of 1990 is not in accordance with law and a direction has been given to the respondents to refix the price of the sugar.

4.

I have gone through the decision of the Delhi High Court and in my opinion the writ petitions deserve to be allowed in view of the findings recorded by the Delhi High Court with which I respectfully agree. The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has clearly held that when the price is to be fixed or determined u/s 3(3C) of the Essential Commodities Act 1955, the four postulates provided in that Section cannot be ignored and as the order of 1980 has been passed without applying Section 3(3C) of the Act the impugned order is liable to be nullified.

5.

For the detailed reasons recorded in the Delhi High Court''s decision which shall form part of this order, these writ petitions are allowed and it is directed that the Central Government should take action in accordance with the Judgment given by the Delhi High Court in the case of Sugar Mills Company