M.M.Dutt, J. - (1.) In this appeal, the appellants, namely, the Union of India, the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Steel, Mines and Coal (Department of Mines) and the Controller of Aluminium have challenged the propriety of the judgment of a learned Judge of this Court whereby the learned Judge made absolute the Rule Nisi issued on the application of Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Limited, hereinafter referred to as HINDALCO, and one of its share-holders, under Article 226 of the Constitution. In the writ application, the respondent HINDALCO challenged the propriety and legality of five orders of the Central Government, all dated Oct. 4. 1979 under the Aluminium Control Order, 1970 passed under Section 3 ef the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The legality and constitutional validity of the provisions of Clauses 4A and 4B of the Aluminium Control Order were also challenged in the writ application.
(2.) At all material times HINDALCO carried and still carries on the business of producing and/or manufacturing aluminium. It owns and operates an aluminium plant at Renukoot, in the district of Mirzapur, within the State of Uttar Pradesh. It produces and/or manufactures the following: (a) aluminium and alloy ingots, billets and wire bars, (b) aluminium wire rods known as 'properzi' rods, (c) aluminium rolled products in various shapes, (d) aluminium extrusions in various shapes and types of sections.
(3.) Besides HINDALCO, there are three other companies which produce and/or manufacture aluminium and its products. These companies are Bharat Aluminium Company Limited, which is a Central Government company the Madras Aluminium Company Ltd., and Indian Aluminium Company Ltd., here inafter referred to as BALCO, MALCO and INDALCO respectively.;