MAVA VYAPAR SANGH Vs. LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are aggrieved by the impugned judgement of the learned single judge of this Court dated 23. 12. 1999 upholding the amendment to the Schedule of the Delhi Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) whereby milk products were also included in the schedule. The appellants are also aggrieved by the consequent action taken under the said Act on account of a notification issued declaring the intention to regulate the marketing of Mawa/khoya as agricultural produce in the National capital Territory of Delhi which plea has also been rejected by the impugned judgement.

(2.) IN order to appreciate the aforesaid challenge, it would be appropriate to first discuss the aims and objects as also the relevant provisions of the said act. The preamble to the said Act reads as under:

(3.) THE Section 2 the said Act is the definition section and Administrator has been defined to mean the Administrator of Union Territory of Delhi appointed by the President of India under Article 239 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the Lieutenant Governor is the Administrator as per Section 2 (a) of the said act. The definition of agricultural produce is given in Section 2 (b) of the said Act and reads as under: 2. Definitions. (b) "agricultural produce" means such produce (whether processed or not)of agriculture, horticulture, forest, animal husbandry, apiculture or pisciculture as are specified in the Schedule;