K.A.Swami, J. - (1.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought for a declaration that Sub-section (2) of Section 8 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') as amended by Karnataka Act No. 43 of 1976 is void, unenforceable as neither in accordance with the proviso to Article 304(b) of the Constitution, previous sanction of the President is obtained to the Bill, nor assent of the President to the Karnataka Act No. 43 of 1976 is obtained under Article 255 of the Constitution. He has also sought for quashing the Notification No. SMD 168 RGN 85, dated 16-1-1985, produced as Annexure-A. The petitioner has also further prayed for a declaration that Sub-clause (37) of Section 2 of the Act, suffers from excessive delegation and to strike down the same.
(2.) The 3rd respondent has filed the statement of objections. Sri Devadas, learned High Court Government Pleader, submits that respondents 1 and 2 adopt the statement of objections filed by the 3rd respondent.
(3.) Having regard to the contentions raised by the petitioner and respondents, the following points arise for consideration : i) Whether Karnataka Act No. 43/76 in so far it amends Section 8(2) of the Act, is violative of Article 301 of the Constitution ; therefore, it is void as neither the previous sanction of the President before introducing or moving the Bill in the Legislature is obtained, as per the proviso to Article 304(b) of the Constitution, nor the assent of the President to the Karnataka Act No. 43 of 1976 is obtained as per Article 255 of the Constitution ? ii) Whether Clause (37) of Section 2 of the Act, suffers from excessive delegation? iii) Whether the notification dated 16-1-1986 produced as Annexure-A is without jurisdiction? iv) Whether a retail seller can be permitted to sell the notified agricultural produce anywhere in the Market area?;