KAPARA COMMITTEE JALAUN Vs. DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER JALAUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BINOD Kumar Roy and M. L. Singhal, JJ. The petitioner, which is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, has come up with a prayer to command opposite parties Nos. 1 and 2 from using coercive methods or taking any proceedings under the Cloth Controlled Order, 1957 for realisation of licence fee for the purpose of renewal of licence of its members number ing 56 for the present, for the year 1987-88.

(2.) IT is asserted by the petitioner that its members are dealers carrying on business of selling and purchasing uncontrolled cloth including Handloom cloth and Powerloom processed cloth who were earlier selling controlled cloth. In the year 1985 its mem bers were served with an order asking to renew their licences and in case their licen-cess are not renewed by 30th August, 1985 late fee will be charged and proceedings will be initiated under the Cloth Controlled Order, 1957. On 22-2-1986 the petitioner filed a representation before the Minister of Food and Supply Uttar Pradesh regarding prevailing corruption and irregularity in the supply department in connection with ob taining a renewal of licence for uncontrolled cloth. According to the petitioner only a person dealing with controlled cotton cloths is required to obtain licence under the U. P. Controlled Cotton Cloth Any Yarn Dealers' Licensing Order, 1957 and thus such persons are not required to get their licences renewed. By a notice published in 'dainik Karamyug Prakash' dated 8-8-87 the District Supply Officer, Orai has directed all persons dealing in both types of cloth to renew their licences. Even the proforma for obtaining licence nowhere ex pressed the word 'controlled cloth'. As the petitioner has no other remedy and the employees of the Supply office are harassing its members, hence this writ petition.

(3.) WE have been taken through the U. P. Controlled Cotton Cloth and Yarn Dealers' Licensing Order, 1957. Section 2 (aa) of the order does not include within its ambit Handloom and Powerloom processed cloths, which are only being dealt with by the members of the petitioner society. In this view of the matter we are of the view that no licence is required for dealing with the aforementioned two types of cloths.