BISHAMBHAR DAYAL CHANDRA MOHAN JAGDISH PRASAD AGARWAL HARYANA DALL INDUSTRIES KALYANMAL DEEP CHAND AGGARWAL TRADING COMPANY ATTAR SINGH SANTOSH KUMAR J B FLOUR MILLS ANNUPCHAND SHYAMLAL K Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue in this and the connected 505 petitions under Art, 32 of the Constitution is of far-reaching significance. It raises questions of the highest importance as to the scope and extent of the executive power of the State under Art. 162 of the Constitution, in relation to regulation and control of trade and commerce in foodstuffs. It necessarily involves a claim by the petitioners who are wholesale dealers of foodgrains that the exercise of such governmental power conflicts with the rule of law and is in flagrant violation of the freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse guaranteed under Art. 301 of the Constitution and the fundamental right to carry on trade and business guaranteed under Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. These petitions fall into two distinct and separate categories, one by the wholesale dealers of foodgrains from the Union Territory of Delhi and the neighbouring States of Punjab and Haryana, and the other by the wholesale dealers of foodgrains from the State of Uttar Pradesh.

(2.) The short question that falls for consideration in some of the writ petitions by wholesale dealers of foodgrains from the Union Territory of Delhi and the State of Punjab and Haryana is whether the action. of the State Government of Uttar Pradesh in setting up check-posts on its borders and the stoppage and seizure of wheat in transit through the State of Uttar Pradesh during the course of inter-State trade and commerce to various destinations in the States of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra at the check-post at Saiyan on the border between the States of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh on the strength of its instructions conveyed by its teleprinter message dated March 31, 1981, was in violation of Art. 301 of the Constitution.

(3.) In a majority of the writ petitions by wholesale dealers from the State of Uttar Pradesh, two questions arise, (1) whether Notification No. P-XXIX-Food-5-5(42)/80 dated April 21, 1981, issued by the State Government of Uttar Pradesh, in exercise of the powers conferred by S. 3 read with S. 5 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), by which cl. 4 of the Uttar Pradesh Foodgrains (Procurement and Regulation of Trade) Order, 1978, has been amended, providing that no wholesale dealer, commission agent or a retailer shall have in stock wheat more than 250 quintals, 250 quintals and 20 quintals respectively, at any time, infringes the fundamental right to carry on trade or business guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (g); and (2) whether the. governmental instructions conveyed by its teleprinter message dated March 31, 1981, placing restrictions on movement of wheat by traders on private account from the State of Uttar Pradesh to various other States and on inter-district movement of wheat within the State, were in breach of the fundamental right under Art. 19 (1) (g) read with Art. 301 of the Constitution.