HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The only point involved in the case is whether the rule for the contravention of which the petitioner was convicted was validly made as laid down in section 22(5) of the Punjab Pure Food Act (Act VIII of 1929).
(2.) On 20th June 1951 the President of India was pleased to issue a proclamation under Article 356 of the Constitution of India and that proclamation is printed in extenso at page 802 of Basu's commentary on the Constitution of India, Second Edition. On 11th August 1951 the Punjab Government framed a rule under section 22(5) of the Punjab Act directing that the ice-candies should not contain more than 6.6 grains of sacchharine per gallon. The question arise whether this rule was validly framed.
(3.) Under Section 22(1) of the Act the State Government was authorised to make rules after previous publication, for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of the Act and under section 22(2)(f) the State Government was authorised to make rules prohibiting the addition of any substance, or of more than a specified proportion of any substance, to any food, and sub-section (5) of section 22 reads as follows :-
"22(5). Before making any rules under the provisions of this section the State Government shall, in addition to observing the procedure laid down in section 21 of the Punjab General Clauses Act, 1898, publish by notification a draft of the proposed rules for the information of persons likely to be affected thereby at least thirty days before a meeting of the Punjab Legislative Assembly. The State Government shall defer consideration of such rules until after the meeting of the Punjab Legislative Assembly next following the publication of the draft in order to give any member of the Assembly an opportunity to introduce a motion for discussing the draft.";
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.