Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1974SC366; (1974)1SCC468; 2SCR398
..... be shown that the executive action taken during the emergency has no authority as a valid law its constitutionality can be challenged. the cotton textiles order 1948 was continued by essential commodities act, 1955. the impugned orders are made under pre-emergency cotton textiles control order. the validity of the impugned orders is challenged under article 19(1)(f) and (g) ..... and a reasonable return on the capital employed in the business was founded on the construction that sub-sections (3), (3a), (3b) and (3c) of section 3 of essential commodities act, 1955 constitute a single scheme and what is implicit in sub-section (3) is made explicit in sub-section (3c).71. the power to fix controlled price is in section 3 ..... related to foodstuffs, cattle fodder etc. which are not products of such industries.30. on 19 october, 1962 a notification was issued under section 2(xi) of the essential commodities act, 1955 declaring commodities specified therein used in the process of manufacturing yarn and machinery for manufacturing cloth. textile machinery production and distribution order, 1962 was issued under section 3 of the ..... provisions of the 1948 order relating to cotton yarn cannot be said to have been continued in force either under section 16 of the essential commodities ordinance 1955 or under section 16(2) of the essential commodities act, 1955 hereinafter referred to as the 1955 act as cotton yarn is not covered by the item 'cotton and woollen textiles' under section 2(a)(iv) of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1969Ker154
..... purports to be a reply to the request of the state government to the central government for delegation of powers under section 3(4) of the essential commodities act, 1955. to appreciate this aspect of the case, we think it necessary to quote the relevant portion of ext. r-l as follows:'it is, ..... of sub-section (2) of section 3, but can only be .-justified under sub-clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955, and since the prior concurrence of the central government required has not been obtained, the impugned order is invalid. clauses (a) and (d) of sub- ..... order the state government did not exceed its authority. but the question whether the impugned order falls under section 3(2)(a) of the essential commodities act (1955), and is bad for want of concurrence of the central government has to be considered.12. the next plea of the appellants was that ..... by the learned single judge that on ac-count of the failure to conform to the provisions of section 3. sub-section (6) of the essential commodities act, 1955 the: impugned order is not invalid. but we do not agree with the reasoning of the learned judge that section 3, sub-section (6) ..... . now we shall deal with the contentions raised by the appellants. the first contention was based on section 3, subsection (6) of the essential commodities act, 1955, reading thus:--'every order made under this section by the central government or by any officer or authority of the central government shall be laid .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1993Guj20
..... essential commodities ordinance, 1955 with effect from 26th january, 1955, the essential supplies (temporary powers) act, 1946, came to an end. the essential commodities ordinance, 1955 was repealed by the essential commodities act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act'), which came into force on and from 1st april, 1955. the order of 1948 issued under the provisions of the essential supplies (temporary powers) act, 1946 has been continued to be in force under the essential commodities act, 1955 ..... validity of section 4 is not questioned before and even if questioned, it will have to be negatived in view of the fact that the essential commodities act, 1955 has been placed in ninth schedule to the constitution of india. section 4 postulates delegation of powers in favour of central government and state government officers ..... constitutionally valid and unassailable.11. learned counsel next submitted that clause 21-a of the order of 1948 is ultra vires section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955 because the delegation of powers to the textile c6mmissioner under the control order 1948 is illegal and invalid, inasmuch as such delegation is not contemplated ..... , on various grounds.10. mr. m. h. joshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the provisions of section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955 are ultra vires articles 14, 19 and 31 of the constitution of india and, therefore, provisions of cotton (control) order 1948 also being bad in law .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1986Mad66
..... or list iii of schedule vii. it is to be remembered that the essential commodities act, 1955 was preceded by the essential commodities ordinance, 1955, which carne into force on 26th january 1955. it is not in dispute that substantially the essential commodities ordinance, 1955, covers the same field as the essential supplies (temporary powers) act, 1946. if the essential commodities ordinance, 1955 has validly been issued, then there is no hiatus between the expiry of ..... the ground that it is saved by the saving clauses in ordinance i of 1955 or in the essential commodities act, 1955. the argument is that the essential supplies (temporary powers) act, 1946, expired on 26th january, 1955; the power to enact legislation like the essential, commodities act, 1955, could be exercised by the parliament only after 22-2-1955 when entry 331n list iii of schedule vii came to be amended and ..... and supply of yarn to the handloom industry as a measure of protection to the handloom industry as it is necessary to achieve the object of the enactment, namely, the essential commodities act, 1955. it is strenuously pressed upon us that installation of a reeling machine does not involve any excessive expenditure and that there were mills which have put reeling machines in small .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(6)ALD411; 2008(6)ALT538; 2009CriLJ427
..... miller or purchaser of paddy or any person, contravening the provisions of the andhra pradesh rice procurement (levy) order, 1984, is liable to be prosecuted under the provisions of the essential commodities act, 1955.33. as the references answered would squarely cover the points to be adjudicated in the writ petitions, we deem it not fit to send back the writ petitions to the ..... as levy from the millers or dealers of paddy or rice in pursuance of the powers delegated to the state governments by the central government under section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955.24. by insertion of this clause, the state governments can issue orders for the purpose of procurement of rice as levy from the millers or dealers. if these two ..... the 166 bags of rice. the third respondent registered a case in crime no. 58/2007 under section 406 of the indian penal code and section 7(1) of the essential commodities act, 1955.4. whereas, writ petition no. 18093 of 2007 is filed to declare the memo dated 19.7.2007 issued by the joint collector, west godavari, directing the petitioner to ..... criminal procedure.12. before adverting to the reference to be answered in the two writ petitions, it is intrinsically necessary to refer to the provisions of the essential commodities act, 1955 (for short, 'the ec act, 1955') for better appreciation of the case. the ec act, 1955, provides, in the interest of general public, for the control of production, supply and distribution of trade and commerce in certain .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1971Delhi285
..... secondly, it conferred on the central government a substantive and separate power to enforce such price linking quite apart from the power already given by section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955. learned counsel for the petitioner shri palkhivala argued that statute has two dimensions, namely, one of time and the other of subject-matter. according to him, the ..... cane growers in the higher price of sugar realized by the sugar producers. thus, the vague phrases 'fair price' or 'price control' used in section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955, assume considerable meaning because of its history and context.8. further, the fixation of 'fair prices' and price control' are a difficult job capable of being performed by ..... delegation of subordinate legislative powers. the objects for which the powers are to be exercised are, however, stated in section 3(1) of the essential commodities act, 1955, namely, to maintain or increase supplies of essential commodities and to secure their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices. these are, thereforee, the guidelines according to which the prices are to be fixed ..... sugarcane, thereforee, is the most important element in the fixation of the price o f sugar. sugarcane is a food-crop. section 3(2)(b) of the essential commodities act, 1955 empowers the central government to provide by order for maintaining or increasing the cultivation of food-crops including the cultivation of sugarcane. it is the price which the cultivators .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 129(2006)DLT477
..... 01.02.1996, the petitioners were accused of having committed offences under section 120-b read with sections 420/468/471 ipc and sections 3/7 of the essential commodities act, 1955. the essential features of the allegations against the petitioners are that they entered into a criminal conspiracy during the period 1992-95 with the object of cheating the government of india ..... be faulted. in this context, there appears to be a difficulty. the difficulty is that the special court under section 12a of the essential commodities (special provisions) act, 1981 gets jurisdiction only if there are offences under the essential commodities act, 1955. if those offences are not there, then the special court would have no jurisdiction in respect of the ipc offences. unfortunately, what has ..... existed. this decision as well as the other decisions mentioned above make it more than clear that the present prosecution against the accused / petitioners under sections 3/7 of the essential commodities act, 1955 cannot be sustained. the very initiation after the omission of clause 3 of the newsprint control order, 1962 would be bad in law. thereforee, to that extent, the ..... the filing of rcs on 01.02.1996, i.e., after the omission of clause 3 and schedule ii of the newsprint control order, 1962. section 7 of the essential commodities act, 1955 is attracted when a person is said to contravene any order made under section 3. the newsprint control order, 1962 is one such order made under section 3. thereforee, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1981Guj87; (1980)2GLR333
..... are urged. firstly, it is submitted that the gujarat rice (export-control) and paddy (movement control) order, 1966 is ultra vires section 3(1) of the essential commodities act, 1955. section 3(1) of the essential commodities act, 1955 runs as under: -'3. (1) if the central government is of opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do for maintaining or increasing supplies of ..... (b) of the constitution:(b) the gujarat rice (export-control) and paddy (movement-control) order. 1966 is ultra vires the section 3(1) of the essential commodities act, 1955 and section 3(6) of the essential commodities act, 1955 as the order was not laid before both houses of the parliament; and(c) the notification issued by the government of india, being no. g. s. ..... this disposes of the first four contentions.'now this order also recites that this order is made in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955 (10 of 1955). it also recites that the government of india issued a particular notification and in view of that notification and after obtaining prior concurrence of the central government, the ..... of articles 301, 302, 303 and 304, and confer and the authority so appointed such powers and such duties as it thinks necessary.' now it clearly appears that the essential commodities act. 1955 is an act of parliament. article 304(b) will not apply in this particular case. the gujarat rice (export-control) and paddy (movement-control) order, 1966 is not a .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC1124; 1SCR39
..... the reasonableness of legislative restrictions on fundamental rights. now coming to the facts of the present case, it is not suggested that the, essential commodities act, 1955, and the impugned act form part of one scheme of legislation. indeed the essential commodities act was enacted to provide in the interest of the general. public for control of production, supply and distribution of, and trade and ..... (iii) it exposed them to a penalty in case the delivery was short of the quota. by a notification issued under the sugar (control) order, 1955, which was made under the essential commodities act, 1955, the central government increased the price of sugar for internal sales by 50 np. per maund to enable the owners to recoup the loss suffered by them ..... restrictions imposed can be on the basis that the freedom was abridged or curtailed unduly or arbitrarily. but for the act, the petitioners could have sold their sugar in the open market without exceeding the rates fixed under the essential commodities act, 1955. the correspondence filed in the ease, marked as annexures a, b and c, clearly demonstrates that both the industry ..... to notice a few relevant and material facts. the essential commodities act, 1955 (act 10 of 1955), was enacted for the purpose mentioned in the preamble to that act. in exercise of the powers conferred by s. 3 of the said act, the central government issued an order dated august 27, 1955, called the sugar (control) order, 1955. under r. 5 of the said order, the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC3125; 1999(4)ARBLR502(SC); 1999(3)BLJR2191; JT1999(5)SC422; 1999(4)SCALE516; (1999)9SCC620; Supp1SCR146
..... edible oilseeds and edible oils (storage control) order, 1977, the vegetable oil product producers (regulation of refined oil manufacture) order, 1973, all framed under section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955, also cannot be of any avail of the appellant industries for the simple reason that none of these orders deals with the topic of regulation of prices and sale and ..... maida, suzi, bran etc. would remain outside the domain of the state legislature.114. shri ranjit kumar then placed reliance on the statutory orders framed under section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955. so far as the wheat rolling flour mills (licensing and control) order, 1957 is concerned, reliance was placed by him on clauses 2 and 10 of the definition clause ..... of 1980 in so far it provides for regulation of marketing of sugarcane is unconstitutional as its marketing is regulated by the provisions of the central act, viz., the essential commodities act, 1955, and the sugarcane (control) order made thereunder? while answering point no. 3 in affirmative, the learned judge at para 39 of the report, made the following pertinent ..... therefore, now proceed to consider this submission.47. sugarcane (control) order, 1966 is issued by the central government in exercise of powers conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955. clause 2 sub-clause (c) defines factory and reads as under:'factory' means any premises including the precincts thereto in any part of which sugar is manufactured by .....Tag this Judgment!