JINARAJA HEGDE Vs. STATE OF MYSORE
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
STATE OF MYSORE
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)The petitioners in these writ petitions have challenged the validity of whole or part of the Mysore Paddy Procurement (Levy) Order, 1966 issued by the State of Mysore in exercise of (he powers conferred by S. 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (Central Act 10 of 1955) read with the orders relevant thereto. The Order (hereinafter called the Levy Order) came into force on 21st October 1966. Some of the petitioners have praved for quashing the notice of demand issued against them by the Enforcement Officer of the concerned taluk. The petitioners are all from the different taluks of South Kanara and North Kanara districts.
(2.)In spite of the various grounds mentioned in the different writ petitions, the learned advocates for the petitioners have addressed their arguments only on three points: -
1. Whether the purchase price fixed under the order as per Schedule II is valid? 2. What is the nature of the obligation requiring the paddy grower to furnish information under Clause 4 of the Order? 3.Whether the scale of paddy fixed in the I Schedule under Clause 3 of the order is inequitable?
We shall deal with each of these questions in their serial order.
(3.)The most Important question relates to the fixation of the purchase price. The Levy Order defines purchase price in clause 2(g) of the said Order. It states:
"'Purchase Price' in relation to any variety of paddy means the price fixed for the purchase of such variety of Paddy in Schedule II."
The Order has been promulgated under S. 3(2) (f) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (Central Act 10 of 1955), which empowers the Central or the State Government to pass an Order providing-
"for requiring any person holding in stock any essential commodity to sell the whole or a specified part of the stock........to a State Government or to an officer or agent of such Government........"
It is with a view to achieve this object, Clause 3 of the Levy Order provides-
"Every grower shall, out of the paddy grown in his holding and held in stock by him in respect of each crop, sell to the State Government or its authorised agent at the purchase price such quantity of paddy in accordance with the scale specified in Schedule I as may be determined by the Enforcement Officer after taking into consideration the information available with him regarding the holding of the grower and the paddy grown in such holding."
In order to enforce this obligation on the part of the paddy growers, sub- clause (2) of this clause enjoins upon the Enforcement Officer to determine the quantity of paddy required to be sold by a grower and serve on the grower an order in the manner specified in clause 1 of sub-sec. (5) of S. 3; such order shall specify the quantity of paddy to be sold, the purchase point at which and the time within which such paddy is to be delivered. Now, so far as the points raised in these writ petitions are concerned, it would be manifest that the order issued by the Enforcement Officer has reference to the purchase price fixed in Schedule II, the quantity of paddy as per the scales specified in Schedule I and has to be served in the manner provided in sub-clause (2) of clause 3 of this order.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.