RUBBANI RICE MILLS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a miller as well as a dealer. In this Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, he has sought for quashing the order dated 28-2-1984 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga in No. FSD. PRC. 21/11/83-84 produced as Annexure-E. The petitioner has also sought for a direction to the 2nd Respondent to issue release certificate to enable him to transport 400 quintals of rice outside the State.

(2.) The facts necessary for deciding the contentions raised by the petitioner are not in dispute. Under the provisions of the Karnataka Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1981, (hereinafter referred to as the Levy Order 1981) the petitioner has surrendered 400 quintals of rice towards levy as per clause-3 of the Levy Order, 1981. This surrender is evidenced by the F.C.I. acknwoledgments bearing Nos. 3537 dated 6-7-1983, 3447 dated 7-7-1983, 3545 dated 7-7-1983 and 3561 dated 11-7-1983. These acknowledgments have not been endorsed to show that the levy free rice pursuant to the surrender of levy evidenced by the acknowlegments, has been transported by the petitioner outside the State. The petitioner has made an application on 29-12-1983 before the 2nd Respondent on the basis of the aforesaid acknowledgments evidencing surrender of levy for grant of release certificate under the provisions of the Karnataka Rice and Paddy Procurement (Levy) Order, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Levy Order, 1983'). The Levy Order, 1983 came into force on 26-11-1983 repealing the Levy Order, 1981. The 2nd Respondent has rejected the request on the grounds that levy had been surrendered under the Levy Order, 1981, that the system of granting release certificate was not contemplated under the Levy Order, 1981; that there was no restriction for the inter-district movement of rice; that the petitioner was free to move the same before 26-11-1983; that no evidence was produced to show that levy free rice pursuant to the aforesaid surrender had not been transported outside the State; that the acknowledgments of surrender made before 26-11-1983 are not valid after 26-11-1983.

(3.) Sri M. P. Eswarappa, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that under the Levy Order, 1981, as soon as the petitioner surrendered 50% of the total quantity of rice owned by him, right to move the remaining 50% of rice for sale either within the State or outside the State accrued to him ; that such right is not taken away by the Levy Order, 1983 which has repealed Levy Order, 1981. Learned Counsel has placed reliance on Clause-15 of the Levy Order, 1983.