G.T.N TEXTILES LTD. AND ANR. ETC. ETC. versus ASSISTANT DIRECTORS, R.O.T. COMMR. AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1993] 2 S.C.R. 403 · Decided: 17-03-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

.... 
G.T.N. TEXTILES LTD. AND ANR. ETC. ETC. 
A 
v. 
ASSISTANT DIRECTORS, R.O.T. COMMR. 
AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
MARCH 17, 1993 
B 
"'-
[KULDIP SINGH AND N.M. KASLIWAL, JJ.) 
Essential Commodities Act, 1955: 
Section J-Textile Control Order, 1986--Clause 16 and notification c 
issued thereunde,--Textile commissioner prescribing manner of pack-
ing--Constitutional validity of 
~ 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Articles 14 and 19( l)(grTexti/e (Control} Order, 1986-Clause 16 and D 
notification issued thereunde,.__ Textile Commissioner prescribing mode of 
packing yam-Whether violative of 
Different varieties of cotton yarn were manufactured by the appel-
!ant-Mills. Packing of the yarn was done in two forms, viz. cone form E 
which was used in powerloom and hosiery industry and hank form which 
was exclusively consumed by the handloom industry. For the cone form of 
packing the ring frame cops were fed to the winding machines and for the 
hank form of packing the cops were fed to the reeling macbines. The 
appellants were packing the yarn in cone form only. Since they had not 
installed the reeling machines, they could not pack the yarn in hank form. 
F 
.,._ 
In exercise of powers under S.3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 
1955, Textile (Control) Order, 1986 was issued by the Government. Clause 
16 of the said order gave power to the Textile Commissioner to issue 
~ 
directions providing the manner of packing of yarn in hanks, cones or in 
... 
any other form and in such proportion as he deemed necessary or ex-
G 
pedient. It also laid down the complete gu;delines for exercise of the 
powers by the Textile Commissioner. Exercising his powers under clause 
16 of the 1986 Order, the Textile Commissioner issued a notification on 
29.3.90, which was amended on 11.5.90 and 17.5.90. According to the 
Notification every producer of yarn should pack in hank form at least 50% H 
403 
404 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1993] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
of the total yarn packed hy him during each half-yearly period for civil 
consumption. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
The appellants challenged the constitutional validity of clause 16 of 
the Textile (Control) Order, 1986 and the Notification issued thereunder, 
by filing Writ Petitions before the High Court. The Writ Petitions were 
dismissed and the appellant-Mills preferred the present appeals. 
The appellants contended that an identical notification dated 
29.6.1979 issued under the Textile (Control) Order, 1948 was struck down 
by the High Court and the said judgment having been upheld by this 
Court, the respondents were bound by the same and the Textile Commis-
sioner had no authority to issue a fresh notification in similar terms; and 
that the appellants could not be compelled to manufacture something for 
which the appellants have not installed necessary machinery and other 
super-structure. It was further contended that the Notification was viola-
tive of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. 
Dismissing the appeals, this Court, 
HELD: 1. The present notification under challenge has been issued 
under Clause 16(1) of the Textile (Control) Order, 1986. Unlike Clause 
21(5) of the 1948 Order, proviso to Clause 16(1) of the 1986 Order 
provides complete guidelines to the Textile Commissioner to issue the 
directions envisaged thereunder. [409G-H] 
Sri Ra11i Lakshmi G.S. & W. Mills Pvt. Ltd. & Others v. Textile 
Commissioner, Bombay & Ors., AIR 1986 Madras 66, distinguished. 
F 
2. In '·order to make available sufficient quantity of hank yarn at 
reasonable price and also for the sustenance of Handloom workers 
engaged in the largest cottage industry in India, it became necessary to 
reserve hank yarn for Handloom sector by making it obligatory on the 
part of the manufacturers of yam to pack a certain percentage of their 
G production packet for civil consumption in the form of banks. Thus the 
notification has been issued in the interest of the general public and also 
for the larger interest of the textile industry, and is not violative of Art. 
19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. [411B-C] 
3. Having accepted the condition regarding packing of yarn in hank 
H form, while taking the licence, under clause 4 of the Industrial Licence, the 
G T.N. TEX11LES v. ASSTT. DIRECTORS (KULDIP SINGH, J.] 
405 
~ 
appellants cannot now turn round and say that they are not bound by the 
same. [ 411F] 
A 
4. There is no violation of Art. 14 of the Constitution since the 
notification has been made applica
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.