Satish Chandra, C.J. - (1.) The petitioners claim that they carry on the business of producing and selling hides, skins and bones by taking dead animals and preparing the hides and bones from them. The carcasses of cattle used by the petitioner are taken from the erstwhile owners of the dead animals.
(2.) The respondent Zila Parishad has framed bye-laws. Thereunder they auction the right to gather carcasses of dead animals within the territory of the Zila Parishad. The auction purchaser of such right interferes with the petitioners carrying on their business. He claims to be exclusively entitled to the carcasses of dead animals within the territories of the Zila Parishad. The petitioners are aggrieved at this action of the Zila Parishad and their contractors. They claim that the carcasses of the dead animals do not vest in the State or Zila Parishad or their contractors. They remain in the owner of the dead animals. They are entitled to carry on their business. The Zila Parishad has no right to create monopoly in such trade in favour of any individual. The bye-laws in so far as they seek to create a monopoly are ultra vires the powers of the Zila Parishad.
(3.) The Zila Parishad does not accept these submissions. It holds that in exercise of the regulatory power conferred by the Zila Parishad Act, the Zila Parishad has ample power to frame bye-laws to regulate trades including abnoxious trades.;