VIJAY BAHADUR PATEL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.

(2.) By means of this petition the petitioner is challenging the validity of the U. P. Regulation of Cold Storages (Amendment) Act, 1997 being U. P. Act No. 2 of 1997. Earlier before the amendment the U. P. Regulation of Cold Storages Act, 1976 provided that the State Government could fix the maximum charges for storing agricultural produce in the Cold Storages. However, by this amendment, now the maximum charges can be fixed by the licence, but any one who has any grievance can approach the State Government under Section 29 (3) of the Act for reducing the charges on the ground that they are unreasonably high.

(3.) We find no unconstitutionally in the aforesaid U. P. Act No. 2 of 1997. Whether there should be a maximum charge or not is for the Legislature to decide, and not for this Court. This Court cannot compel fixing maximum charges. The impugned amendment has only modified the earlier law, and it has now provided that the licensee itself can fix the maximum charges subject to reduction of the rate by the State Government. In other words. In the first instance the maximum charges will be fixed by the licensee itself. However, the said amendment has still given a benefit to the agriculturists in the sense that if they think that the charges are unreasonably high, they can approach the State Government which can reduce them under Section 29 (3). This is an age of liberalisation and it is not for this Court to impose controls. Thus, we uphold the validity of U. P. Act No. 2 of 1997.