Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1994Mad104
..... of petroleum and chemicals, department of petroleum and natural gas, is reproduced hereunder: 'g.s.r. 699(e) -- in exercise of the powers conferred by s. 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955 (10 of 1955), the central government hereby makes the following order, namely :-- 1) this order may be called non-pressure stoves (quality control) order, 1990. 2) it extends to the whole of ..... mr. r. krishnamurthi, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, reported in the hamdard dawakhana (wakf), delhi v. the union of india, : 2scr192 , which deals with the provisions of the essential commodities act and the fruit products order. the act was passed in the year 1955 for the purpose of controlling the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commence in certain ..... commodities in the interests of the general public. the commodities which were intended to be brought within the purview of the act were essential commodities as defined by s. 2(a) of the act. amongst them are included foodstuffs .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(1)MhLj806
..... . restriction on hoarding of scheduled commodities:- no person (including fair price shop and authorised establishment) shall draw or cause to be drawn any scheduled ..... prosecution has relied on sections 20 and 21 of the maharashtra scheduled commodities (regulation of distribution) order, 1975 which was issued by the government of maharashtra, food and civil supplies department on 26th september, 1975 under sub-section 1 and sub-section 2 of section 3 of the essential commodities act 1955. section 20 of the aid order of 1975 reads as follows:'20 ..... was informed about the same. the tahasildar directed the supply inspector to take custody of the palm oil seized by pw 1 as there was contravention of the provisions of essential commodities act. the supply inspector accordingly took custody of the palm oil and the jeep under panchanama. thereafter, tahasildar made report to the collector about the same. the collector directed ..... that the order was passed by the government prohibiting the sale of palm oil in the open market or any order making the possession of palm oil punishable under the essential commodities act.5. aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 29th april 1987 delivered by the special judge in criminal case no. 1 of 1987 acquitting the respondents-accused, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2001KAR380; 2001(1)KarLJ282
..... ends to meet. 3. the state government, in exercise of its powers conferred under section 5 of the essential commodities act, 1955 ('act' for short), has made karnataka essential commodities (public distribution system) control order, 1992 to regulate the distribution of essential commodities (rice, wheat, wheat products, sugar, edible oil and kerosene). clause 3 of the said order provides ..... of the powers delegated to it under the provisions of the essential commodities act, 1955. the two orders regulate two different spheres of activity. the first regulates dealing in essential commodities other than essential commodities distributed under the public distribution system. the second regulates distribution of essential commodities under the public distribution system. a conjoint regarding of the licensing ..... authorised authority under the pds control order and obtaining of a licence under the licensing order will not entitle such licensee under the licensing order to distribute essential commodities (including kerosene) under the public distribution system. this court, after considering the provisions of pds control order and the kerosene (restriction on use and ..... holder shall run the fair price depot, in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in the authorisation and no other person shall sell any essential commodity supplied by the government meant for distribution under public distribution system. there is no provision under the pds control order, for grant of hawkers' .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1988KAR1086; 1988(1)KarLJ458
..... kannada, involves the interpretation of second proviso to section 6a(1) of the essential commodities act, 1955 ('the act' for short).2. the learned single judge held that for the release of the vehicle in lieu of its confiscation, the fine payable shall not exceed the market price of the essential commodity carried by the vehicle and not the market value of the vehicle. the ..... such use.'4. the primary target of section 6a is the essential commodity. its object is to deter a person from dealing in an essential commodity illegally. transportation of an essential commodity which is dealt illegally, is an act, according to the learned government, advocate, equally illegal and the said act of carrying an essential commodity calls for an equally severe punishment, such as the confiscation of ..... construction by g.p. singh 2nd edn. page 43). in the context of this act, the provisions of section 6a are to be interpreted as to impose a penalty bearing a relationship to the subject matter of the offence, which here is the essential commodity.11. it is also incorrect to say that the subject matter of the proviso being ..... seized;(b) any package, covering or receptacle in which such essential commodity is found; and(c) any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used in carrying such essential commodity.provided that without prejudice to any action which may be taken under any other provision of this act no foodgrains or edible oilseeds seized in pursuance of an order made under section 3 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1972AP318
..... right of the petitioner which is guaranteed under art. 19 (i) (f) of the constitution of india.6. the parliament passed the essential commodities act 1955 (act 10 of 1955), hereinafter referred to as the act. section 3(2)(j) of the said act reads as follows:---------------'section 3(1): if the central government is of opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do for ..... the respondents submitted that clause 5 of the said order was neither vague nor in excess of the delegated power, nor inconsistent with section 3(2)(j) of the essential commodities act, 1955. the act contemplates no proof before search and seizure but only reasonable belief. the order itself has been rescinded and there is no need to go into the question of the validity ..... pradesh coarse grains (export control) order, 1965, hereinafter called the order, is in excess of the power conferred on government of india by section 3(2)(j) of the essential commodities act, 1955.5. although sri babulu reddy, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner challenged the legality and validity of the seizure of 76 bags of the millets on various grounds in ..... that cl. 5 of the andhra pradesh coarse grains (export control) order, 1965 is in excess of the power conferred upon the central government by s. 3 of the essential commodities act. 1955. the petitioner also contended that the seizure was illegal and accordingly prayed for a direction to the respondents to release the goods and not to take any section against him .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1960AP431
..... of west godavari, east godavari, krishna and guntur districts. they mainly raise a question relating to the validity of the essential commodities act, 1955 (act x of '1955) as amended by acts xiii and xxviii of 1657 (hereinafter referred to as the act) and certain notifications and orders issued thereunder.2. the relevant facts may be briefly stated. a notification issued by the ..... of prices and the several notifications issued bearing on the requisitioning of foodstuffs is questioned, their main attack is concentrated on some of the provisions of the essential commodities act as also on the relevant notifications.at the outset, it may be mentioned that most of the petitions concern requisitions made under the price control order dated ..... ordinance by reason of want of legislative authority within the definition of essential commodities.the present act follows the same pattern as ..... was passed. but this expired before the constitution iii amendment act had become law. therefore, an ordinance was promulgated to take effect on 26-1-1955 making provision for regulating trade and commerce in and the production, supply and distribution of the essential commodities. this was replaced by the act, which included articles which were left out earlier in the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(5)ALD486; 2000(3)ALT562a
..... effectively with persons indulging in such anti-social activities and the evil of vicious inflationary prices, it is necessary to make certain special provisions, by way of amendment to the essential commodities act, 1955 (10 of 1955) for a period of fifteen years.'4. originally the period given was ten years but it was amended by another amendment to make it fifteen years. this amendment ..... court while disposing of a batch of writ petitions being wp no.15224 of 1999 and batch found that the amending act 18of 1981 was not in existence therefore cases under essential commodities act had to be dealt with in accordance with the essential commodities act, 1955 as it stood before the amendment of 1981. necessary directions were given. it appears that the registry had issued a circular ..... is no saving clause, therefore, offences registered after 25th april, 1998 shall have to be dealt with under the unamended act i.e., essential commodities act, 1955. the offences registered before 25th april, 1998 can be dealt with either the ordinances or the amending act 18 of 1981 depending upon the date on which the offence was committed.7. with these clarifications, the application is disposed .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(3)LS252
..... of wheat, paddy/rice, coarse grains, sugar, edible oil seeds and edible oils and shall not require a permit or license therefore under any order issued under the essential commodities act, 1955. the provisions of this control order shall take effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any order made by a state government before the commencement of this order, except ..... quantity of wheat, paddy/rice, coarse grains, sugar, edible oilseeds and edible oils and shall not require a permit or license therefor under any order issued under the essential commodities act, 1955. 4. the provisions of this order shall take effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any order made by a state government before the commencement of this order except ..... evidence to show that they have purchased such rice. in spite of that, the authorities have booked cases against the petitioners under section 6-a of the essential commodities act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to 'the act') and charge sheeted them on the file of the district collector, west godavari district at eluru. during the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioners were allowed ..... in the order at fair prices throughout the country. now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955 (10 of 1955), the central government hereby makes the following order : - 1. short title. extent and commencement (a) this order may be called the removal of (licensing requirements, stock limits and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1963All29; 1963CriLJ35
..... constitution, the provisions of clause 3 of the order are ultra vires. this order was framed by the central government purporting to exercise powers conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955 and was published in the u.p. gazette extraordinary, part ii, dated the 24th of december, 1958. clause 3 of the order reads as follows :'no person shall move or ..... constitution is subject to any law framed by the parliament under article 302. the impugned order has been framed under section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955. that act was passed by parliament. the preamble of that act runs as follows:'an act to provide, in the interests of the general public, for the control of the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce ..... jagdish sahai, j.1. on being convicted under section 7 of the essential commodities act, 1955 for contravening rule 3 of the u.p. paddy (restriction on movement) order, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the order) by a magistrate, the petitioners appealed before the learned sessions ..... the present case, clause 3 ofthe impugned order would be protected by clause (2)of article 303 inasmuch as the impugned order hasbeen framed under section 3 of the essential commodities act. that act was passed because the parliament was dealing with the situation arisingfrom scarcity of goods in some parts of this country and was thus meeting an emergency createdby the scarcity of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1969All560
..... to save the rules once the same appeared to be in contravention of article 301. here the position is different in so far as there is no provision in the essential commodities act, 1955 to indicate as to what would be the effect of the rules or orders made thereunder. in the absence of any such express provision, the principles of statutory interpretation must ..... result of the report lodged by respondent no. 3 at police station sujauli on march 15, 1967, the petitioner is being prosecuted before respondent no. 2 under section 3/7, essential commodities act, 1955. the petitioner challenges the validity of this prosecution firstly on the ground that in view of the facts stated above, the petitioner cannot be taken to have contravened the amended ..... it to continue the proceedings against the petitioner under section 3/7 essential commodities act, 1955.(d) that a writ of mandamus may be issued to the respondent no. 2 commanding him to release the foodgrains seized from the petitioner's firm and put in the ..... court.(b) to issue a writ of certiorari ordering the respondent no. 2 to produce a copy of the charges framed by him against the petitioner under section 3/7, essential commodities act, 1955 on may 25, 1967 and the same may be quashed by this hon'ble court.(c) that a writ of prohibition may be issued to the respondent no. 2 forbidding .....Tag this Judgment!