FIDAHUSSAIN ABDULJI BOHARA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference by the learned-Sessions Judge, Ratlam, made on an application' by one of the persons on trial before the Magistrate 1st Class. , for contravention of the provisions of paras 4, 5 and 15 (3) of the Iron and' Steel Control Order and notifications issued under it, in exercise of the powers conferred on the Central Government under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The learned Sessions Judge was probably influenced by a ruling of this High Court which it has since been set aside by the Supreme Court. He has also not looked into the implications of paragraph 5 of the said. Order.

(2.) IRON and Steel being essential commodities as defined in the Essential Commodities Act! of 1955, the Central Government has promulgated the Iron and Steel Control Order, 1956. Under Para 4 of the Order, Iron and Steel can be acquired on permits, subject to the conditions mentioned in them. In addition the" Iron and Steel Controller is empowered under Rule 15 to fix the price from time to time; any sales over the moximum price fixed by him is punishable under para 15 (3 ).

(3.) THE allegation against the applicant Fidahussain is that for one thing he was disposing of iron and steel in contravention of parti 5, and for another, of para 15 (3) as he was selling at a price higher than the one fixed by the Controller. His case is that para 5 is not applicable as he was neither producer nor stock-holder; as for para 15 (3) the Controller was not competent to fix the prices and under para 15 (3) as such the rule itself was ultra vires.