(1.) BY the first two prayers in this petition, the petitioners are challenging the validity of Notification dated 28.2.83 issued by the Central Government under section 2 (a) (xi) of the Essential Commodities Act 1955 declaring seeds specified therein as essential commodities for the purpose of the said Act and the Seeds (Control) Order 1983 issued by the Central Government under section 3 of the said Act on the ground that they are unconstitutional, ultra vires and illegal. There is a third prayer for declaring that Entry 33 of the List III to the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India does not empower either the Union Legislature or the State Legislature or make laws in respect of "seeds". In fact, the third prayer is the crux of the argument of the petitioner.
(2.) 1994 (1) SCC 278. The petitioners who were probably waiting for over ten years for the result in the said cases filed this writ petition in May, 1994. In fact, the petitioners filed Writ Petition (Civil) No. 303 of 1994 containing a prayer to declare the judgment of this Court to be invalid. However, they withdrew it on 25.3.94 stating that they would file a properly drafted writ petition. The Notification of Central Government dated 24.2.83 reads thus :
(3.) 1964 (1) SCR 995. In that case the Court held that forward contracts in cotton seeds were not prohibited by law as cotton and cotton seeds were not included in the definition of 'essential commodity'. In the course of the discussion, the Bench observed as follows : "It is clear that before the order made under rule 81 of the Defence of India Rules continues in force notwithstanding the expiration of the Defence of India Rules, it is necessary that the order must be in respect of any matter specified in section 3. Section 3 empowers the Central Government to make various orders but only in connection with essential commodities. No order can therefore be considered to be "in respect of any matter specified in section 3" unless it is in respect of an essential commodity.