MOTILAL JAIN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition under Article 226, the petitioners have challenged constitutional validity of Sections 8 (c) and 62 (d1) of the M. P. Excise Act, 1915 and M. P. Mahua Rules, 1959.

(2.) THE petitioner No. 1 is a dealer in Mahua flower holding a licence under the M. P. Mahua Rules, 1959 and the petitioner No. 2 is the agent of petitioner No. 1. 120 tonnes of Mahua flower was transported by the petitioners on 25th May. 1984 from Sailwada, District Damoh, to Runeeja, District Ujjain. According to the petitioners, the Mahua flowers were transported under a valid permit issued by the District Excise Officer, Damoh dated 18-5-1984 which was valid upto 27-5-1984. The truck in which the Mahua flowers were transported was checked and seized by the Hying Squad of Excise Department, Sagar. At the relevant time of checking, the petitioners could not show the permit for transportation of the Mahua flowers, which was presented to the concerned officer on the next day. Later on, the petitioner No. 1 moved an application for release of seized Mahua flowers on the ground that they are lying in the open place and are deteriorating. His application was rejected. However, the Chief Judicial Magistrate directed auction of Mahua to licence holders on an application moved by the Excise Department. The Excise Department filed a challan in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sagar under Section 37 of the M. P. Excise Act, 1915. As per the return filed by the respondents, the petitioners were not holding permit for transportation of the Mahua flowers; the permit which was produced was not in respect of the goods carried and seized, and in any case, the goods were not transported on the route prescribed under the permit. The bone of contention in this petition is that the M. P. State Legislature has no legislative competence to regulate the movement or trade of Mahua flowers under the provisions of Sections 8 (c) and 62 (d-1) and the M. P. Mahua Rules, 1959 framed under Section 62 (d-1) of the M. P. Excise Act, 1915 as it is beyond the competence of the State Legislature. The respondents, on the other hand, supported the legislative competence of the State Legislature to enact the aforesaid provision under Entry 8, List II of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India.

(3.) THE legislative power of the State Legislature is limited by the. provisions relating to distribution of the powers and other limitations imposed by different Constitutional provisisons. The provisions made by the State Legislature, which are not covered under the said provisions, will be a nullity. The enactment will be without legislative competence of the State if it is not referable to any matter dealing with and with respect to the matters in List II or III of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. Thus, it has to be seen whether the powers exercised by the M. P. State Legislature are referable to any of the Entries in List II or III of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. The State heavily relied on Entry 8, List II of Seventh Schedule for exercising powers under the Constitution for its authority to legislate the relevant provisions i. e. Sections 8 and 62 of the M. P. Excise Act which read as under :