VISHNU DAYAL MAHENDRA PAL MS KESHO RAM BUDH PRAKASH HARI RAM KRISHAN GOPAL LALA RAM LAL BHAGAT RAM GYAN CHAND ANIL KUMAR AGGARWAL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the above writ applications under Article 32 of the Constitution the validity of the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964 (U. P. Act No. XXV of 1964 as amended by U. P. Act No. 10 of 1970) (briefly called the Act) and the rules made thereunder are challenged on the ground of violation of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

(2.) The petitioners in all the above cases are traders or commission agents dealing in agricultural produce.

(3.) Before we deal with these submissions, we may turn our attention to the Act. As the preamble shows the Act has to provide for the regulation of sale and purchase of agricultural produce and for the establishment, superintendence, and control of markets therefor in Uttar Pradesh. The Statement of Objects and Reasons gives a clear picture of the evils sought to be remedied by this legislation and a portion therefrom may be extracted below:-