BAJAJ HINDUSTAN LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner No. 1 is a public limited company filed this writ petition along with petitioner No. 2 who is a share holder of the aforesaid company, challenging the Government Order dated 4. 1. 2007 copy whereof is annexed as Annexure 9 to the writ petition. It was further prayed that the respondents be directed to determine the1 transportation cost of the sugar cane trans ported from purchase center to factory taking into account the price of diesel and other relevant factors involved and allow the rebate in accordance with the figures thus arrived at. A prayer has been made by the petitioner that a writ of certiorari be issued quashing the Clause 3-A of the Sugar Cane (Control) Order, 1966 being redundant. It is prayed that a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or " direction be issued quashing Clause 3-A of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 in so far as it limits permissible rebate of the transportation of one quintal of sugarcane for a distance of one kilometer at 2. 5 paise and limited to a maximum of 32 paise per quintal irrespective of distance involved and fixing maximum amount payable to the petitioner on account of transportation of sugarcane.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to filing of the present writ petition are that the petitioner is involved in manufacture of sugar from the sugarcane purchased within the area reserved for the petitioner. Petitioners' statement is that sugar industry is an industry which is controlled by both Union and State Governments. THE controversy in this writ petition is regarding price of the sugarcane fixed and recoverable by the manufactures under Clause 3-A of Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966.

(3.) THAT the said Act defines "essential Commodity" in Section 2 (a) (v) to be any "foodstuffs including edible oilseeds and oils", by clause (b) "food crops" is defined to include crops of sugarcane.