A B ABDUL KADIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are Stockists or 'a' Class licensees under the Rules framed in exercise of the powers conferred by S. 5 of the Cochin tobacco Act, VII of 1084, and published in the Travancore Cochin Government gazette (Extraordinary) dated the 25th January 195 1. S. 5 of the Act reads as follows: "the Diwan may, from time to time, after previous publication, make rules consistent with this Act, to permit absolutely or subject to any conditions, and regulate all or any of the following matters: (a) the possession of tobacco for the purpose of sale, (b) the transport of tobacco, (c) the import or export of tobacco, (d)the sale of tobacco and the farm of duty leviable on the sale of tobacco by retail, and cultivation of tobacco. All such rules shall be published in the Cochin government Gazette and shall then have the force of law".

(2.) R. 14 of the Rules provides that "the vend of tobacco of all kinds is prohibited throughout the State, except under a licence" ; R. 15 that the "licence for the vend of tobacco shall be of the following descriptions: (i) Stockist or 'a' Class license, (ii) Wholesale or 'b' Class licence and (iii) Retail or 'c' Class licence' and R. 16 (i) and (ii) (i) Holders of Stockist or 'a' Class licences shall be entitled to purchase tobacco from any dealer within or without the State without any quantitative restriction. This class of licensees shall sell only to other 'a' Class licensees or to 'b' Class licensees. ' (ii) The annual fees for these licenses shall be as follows:- N. B. For the purpose of calculating Stockist license fee in respect of tobacco preparations, the cost price of the article will be taken into account. The license fees will be realised only for the quantities brought in from outside the State".

(3.) THE words "with Our sanction" and "or subject to the payment of any duty or fee" do not occur in S. 5 of the cochin Tobacco Act, VII of 1084. In the view we have taken of the powers of the maharaja of Travancore in the matter of delegation in Para. 10 of our judgment in O. P. Nos. 2, 6 and 7 of 1955 (E)-a view which is equally applicable to the maharaja of Cochin -the omission of the words "with our sanction" is by no means material. In our opinion the omission of the words "or subject to the payment of any duty or fee" is also of no consequence as the words "or subject to any conditions" occurring in S. 5 of the Cochin enactment will be sufficient to sustain the levy impugned in these petitions.