VENKATESWARA RICE MILL Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two writ petitions the validity of clause 3 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Rice Procurement (Levy) and Restriction on Sale Order, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as the Procurement Order) is involved. For the purpose of determining the question involved it would suffice if we refer to the facts stated in W. P. No. 4110 of 1974.

(2.) There are 37 petitioners. Among them petitioners 1 to 30 are millers and petitioners 31 to 37 are dealers. The millers carry on milling operations for hire and none of them carry on business in food grains. The millers i, e. petitioners 1 to 30 do not hold food grains dealers licence. According to them, dealers having licence and producers bring paddy to their mills for milling purposes and therefore when they do not produce or manufacture rice" they cannot he called upon to sell particular percentage of rice milled at their respective mills under the rice levy system. Therefore, what they contend is this rice levy applies only to dealers and not to millers who have no licence to carry on trade in rice. It is their case that they only collect milling charges and nothing more.

(3.) Mr. Babulu Reddy the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both the petitions strenuously contended relying upon the decision of Chinnappa Reddy J. in W. -P. No. 1291 of 1968 and batch dated 22-3-1968 that it is contrary to the requirements of the Procurement Order to call upon millers, who were not dealers and who only mill paddy on receipt of hire charges, to sell levy rice to an agent or officer duly authorised by the Govt. at the notified price. It is, therefore, necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of the Procurement Order and the Essential Commodities Act.