DEEP NARAIN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are agriculturists who produce wheat in their holdings, they have challenged validity of the U. P. Wheat (Levy Regulation of Trade and Control of Movement) Order, 1975, by means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) THE U. P. Wheat (Levy Regulation of Trade and Control of Movement) Order, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Order) was issued by the Governor of Uttar Pradesh on 7-4-1975 in exercise of his powers under section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Clause 3 of the Order requires a wheat producer to sell wheat to the Collector at the purchase centre fixed by him for the price specified in the Order. Schedule II to the Order lays down scale for the calculation of quantity of levy as wheat. THE quantity of levy varies on the basis of sown area by the agricultural producer and the aggregate area of land held by him. Clause 4 of the Order restricts right of producer to dispose of or part with the possession of any portion of his produce of wheat unless he delivers the levy due to the authority concerned in accordance with the provisions contained in the Order. Clause 2(m) defines the specified price according to which a producer is entitled to the price of Rs. 105.00 per quintal of levy wheat. Clause 7 of the Order empowers Collector to seize such quantity of wheat from the possession of the producer as may be equivalent to the levy due from him. Contravention of the Order is punishable under section 7 of the Act.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY wheat is essential commodity within the meaning of Sec. 2(a) of the Act. There is no dispute that the State Government under Sec. 3(2) of the Act is empowerd to issue an order requiring any producer holding stock of wheat to sell it to the State Government. Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, urged that since no controlled price of wheat at which it could be sold to the consumers has been fixed, the State Government had no authority in law to specify price of levy wheat. The petitioners are not bound to sell levy wheat to the Government at the rate of Rs. 105 per quintal, instead they are entitled to the price prevailing or likely to prevail in the post harvest period in the locality. The petitioners contention is well supported by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in M/s Sita Ram Jwala Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1975 All. 272. The Bench after considering the various provisions of section 3 and 3-B and various sub clauses of section held that under section 3-B, the State Government was bound to pay to the dealers either the controlled price as contemplated by clause (i) of sub-section 3-B or the price prevailing or likely to prevail in the post-harvest period in the area as contemplated by clause (ii) of section 3-B. The price of levy foodgrain as specified in the order was held to be illegal as that did not constitute controlled price of the foodgrain within the meaning of the Act. After the judgment of the Division Bench, section 3 was amended by the State Legislature by the Essential Commodities (U. P. Amendment) Act, 1975, No. XVIII of 1975. Section 3 (2)(f) and section 3-B were amended with retrospective effect in the following manner :- * * * *