SYED AHMED AGA Vs. STATE OF MYSORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two Writ Petitions before us under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by persons carrying on the business of silkworm cocoon rearing and reeling challenge the validity of various amendments of the Mysore Silkworm Seed and Cocoon (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Mysore Act 5 of 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Principal Act') by the Mysore Silkworm Seed and Cocoon. (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) (Amendment), Act, 1969 (hereinafter called as the'Amending Act'). The petitioners alleged that their fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution have been illegally interfered with by these amendments in so far as the amendments impose additional restrictions upon these rights without having secured the Presidential sanction required by the proviso to Article 304 (b) of the Constitution.

(2.) Article 304 of the Constitution reads as follows:

(3.) It will be seen that Art. 301 of the Constitution provides:"Subject to the other provisions of this Part, trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the territory of India shall be free". Article 302 limits the powers of Parliament to impose "restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce or intercourse between one State and another or within any part of the territory of India", to such restrictions "as may be required in the public interest". Restrictions falling under Art. 304 (b) must not only be reasonable but are expressly required to be in public interest. It is in order to ensure that purposes of Art. 304 (b) are satisfied that a bill in a State Legislature has to obtain the previous sanction of the President. It is worth remembering that Art. 255 of the Constitution provides for a retrospective curing of the defect of want of previous sanction by the President so that, where this requirement has been overlooked before an enactment, public interest may not suffer by any want of sanction.