HARI COLD STORAGE AND GEN MILLS CO PVT LTD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these connected petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, common questions of law arising in identical circumstances, are involved. Accordingly, all these petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment. Petitioners in all these cases are owners of cold storages located in the State of U. P. They carry on the business of providing cold storage facility to those who agree to pay charges for hiring space for storage of potato.

(2.) ON 16th of March 1972, the State of U. P. Purporting to exercise its powers under rule 114 of the Defence of India Rules 1971, promulgated an Order entitled U. P. Cold Storage Order 1972. This order sought to regulate the running of cold storage business by issue of licences and by obliging the cold storage owners not to levy hire charges for storage of agricultural produce at a rate higher than that specified in the second schedule of the Order (storage charges specified for storing potato were not to exceed Rs. 8.00 per quintal for the entire period February to November or part thereof). Aforesaid Order was subsequently amended on 27th June, 1972, 9th February, 1973, and 20th March, 1975. By these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners challenge the validity of the Cold Storage Order 1972, and particularly, its clause which fixes the maximum hiring charges for storage of agricultural produce, inter alia on the ground that neither the provisions contained in the order fall within the ambit or scope of the powers conferred by Rule 114 of the Defence of India Rules, the conditions precedent for making the order existed.

(3.) A perusal of Rule 114 (2) shows that the Power under this rule can be exercised if certain conditions pre-exist, namely, that the State Government has formed an opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do for securing either-