BARAK VALLEY AGRICULTURISTS AND MACHINE OWNERRS ASSOCIATION Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review application has been filed against the judgment given by this Court in Writ Appeal No. 497/95 on 2nd November, 1995, which has been filed in pursuance of the order passed by the Apex Court on 8th July, 1996, which runs as follows : "Delay condoned. Learned counsel states that though it was agreed before the High Court that the hullers in question were operated by diesel engine and as such were not driven by power because of which Section 3-A of the Rice Milling Industry (Regulation) Act, 1958 has no application, in the impugned judgment there is no mention of this aspect of the case; If the contention of the petitioner be correct, it would be open to the petitioner to file a review petition in the High Court whereupon such order would be passed as deemed legal and just by the High Court. With this observation, the petition is disposed of."

(2.) We have heard Mr. M. Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the review petitioner, at some length. Mr. B.P. Bora, learned Sr. Govt. Advocate, has appeared on behalf of the State/respondents and Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Central Govt. Standing Counsel, has appeared on behalf of the Union of India. Mr, M. Bhuyan, learned counsel who had appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 7 in the Civil Rule, has also appeared before us.

(3.) A bare perusal of the order passed by the Apex Court, would clearly show that: the order has been passed on the basis of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner before the Apex Court that it was agreed before the High Court that the hulllers in question were operated by diesel engine and as such were not driven by power because of which Section 3-A of the Rice Milling Industry (Regulation) Act, 1958 has no application and that in the impugned judgment, there is no mention of this aspect of the case. The Apex Court held that "If the contention of the petitioner be correct, it would be open to the petitioner to file a review petition in the High Court whereupon such order would be passed as deemed legal and just by the High Court." (emphasis provided).