JASWANT SUGAR MILLS LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of fourteen petitions (Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 442d/ 1964 to 455d/64), which have been filed by different petitioners but in which the allegations made are identical. In these petitions a prayer has been made for the issuance of a writ of quo warranto and mandamus restraining the respondents (Union of India and the Director of Food and Civil Supplies Delhi) from issuing orders or allotment of permits for import of sugar for the months of July, August 1964 to Delhi Sugar License holders for the Delhi territory and to quash the present system of allotment of sugar introduced by respondent No. 2 and restore the system of allotment adopted by the Union of India for allotment of sugar quota prior to 22nd May 1964 or to make allotment to all sugar dealers licence holders on the basis of equal distribution.

(2.) THESE fourteen petitions are by some out of the sugar dealers who were holding licenses under the Delhi Sugar Dealers Licencing Order 1963 The total quota for Delhi territory allotted by the Central Government was 65,000 bags per month This quota was distributed by the Directorate of Sugar and Vanspati Ministry of Food and Agriculture Government of India. After 22nd June 1964 according to the petitioner the Central Government transferred this work of distribution of sugar to licensed dealers to the Delhi Administration whereas according to the return filed by the Centre) Government as well as by the Delhi Administration The Central Government appointed the Delhi Administration as one of the nominees under clause 8 of the Sugar Control Order 1963 issued on the 17th April 1963 under Rule 125 (2) of the Defence of India Rules 1962

(3.) THE Directors of Food and Civil Supplies, Delhi made a list of 54 dealers but according to the administration 64 dealers, to whom this quota was to be distributed for retail sale in the market The petitioners are not in the list of 64 dealers though they were licenced sugar dealers prior to 22nd June 1964 as the petitioners have been deprived of their right to deal in sugar under the license held by them before 22nd June. 1904, they have moved this Court with the prayer already set out in the earlier part of this judgment.