- (1.) The respondents manufacture weights and measures in their factory at Deogarh in the District of Santhal Parganas of the State of Bihar. In view of the provisions of Section 10 of the Bihar Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1959 the authorizes insisted on verifying and stamping the said weights on payment of fees. The contention raised on behalf of the respondent was that their weights were meant for sale and delivery in the other States. Hence, the authorities had no power to verify and stamp the weights under the aforesaid provisions of the Act. Since the authorities did not accept the said contention, the respondents Filed a writ petition before the High court and the High court by the impugned order allowed the petition by holding that since the weights were manufactured for delivery in the other States, the authorities had no power under the said provisions to verify and stamp them.
(2.) With respect, we, find it difficult to accept the reasoning of the High court which suggests that by providing for verifying and stamping the weights meant for sale or delivery in the other States, the State Legislature had exceeded its territorial jurisdiction. The verification and stamping is on the weights manufactured in the State. It is irrelevant whether the weights are sold in the State or outside the State. The said provisions have been enacted to protect the interests of the buyers or consumers. Once the weights are manufactured, it is not possible to keep track of their movement. It is also not unlikely that part of the weights may travel to the internal market in the State either initially or after their sale and delivery in the other States. Even otherwise, it is in the interest of the consumers and in keeping with the object of the legislation that the weights should be verified and stamped at the very inception at the place where they are manufactured. The provisions made by any State Legislature for verifying and stamping the weights manufactured in the State cannot, therefore, be said to be beyond its territorial legislative competence.
(3.) In this view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order of the High Court and allow the appeal. Since none has appeared on behalf of the respondent-company, there will be no order as to costs.;