LAWS(ALL)-2008-3-83

COX INDIA LIMITED Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On March 14, 2008
COX INDIA LIMITED Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAKESH Sharma, J. By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the validity of U. P. Excise (Liquor Transit) Rules 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ).

(2.) THE facts are that the petitioner being a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 runs a distillery manufacturing country liquor and foreign liquor. THE distillery is located in Naugaon in the district Chhatarpur (Madhya Pradesh ). THE petitioner while transporting whisky manufactured by it from its distillery at Naugaon to Gwalior experienced difficulty, in as much as, whisky had to pass through the territory of the State of Uttar Pradesh. According to the petitioner, the consignment was on unbroken transit by the route Naugaon-Mauranipur-Jhansi-Dabra-Gwalior. THE reason for the difficulty, according to the petitioner, was that the Rules contemplate issue of a transit pass known as "permit" only if liquor is being transported from one State, through the territory of Uttar Pradesh, to another State. THE petitioner says that because the goods were being transported from one place in the State of Madhya Pradesh to another place in the same State of Madhya Pradesh and during such transport they were passing through the territory of Uttar Pradesh, therefore the permit could not have been issued under the said Rules. THE regulatory measure under the Rules thus amounts to unreasonable restrictions on the freedom of the trade of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 19 and is also violative of freedom of trade and commerce guaranteed under Articles 301, 302 and 304 (b) of the Constitution of India. THE petitioner has also urged that under Entry 30 of the List-I (union list) of the 7th Schedule to the Constitution of India carriage of goods by railways, sea or airways or by national waterways in mechanically propelled vessels is the subject matter exclusively within the domain of the Parliament and consequently out of the legislative competence of the State Government. According to the petitioner Entry-13 of List-II is subject to the provision of List-I and List-III.

(3.) THE preamble of these Rules says that with a view to stop smuggling of liquor from other provinces of India the Governor has made these Rules for the transport of liquor of "one province" to "other province" through Uttar Pradesh. Rule 3 (1) also says that no liquor shall be transported from "one State to "other State" through the State of U. P. except in accordance with a permit issued under these Rules.