LexM. C. V. S. ARUNACHALA NADAR ETC. versus THE STATE OF MADRAS & OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
92 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ·[1959] Supp. " 158 M. C. V. S. ARUNACHALA NADAR ETC. October 6. V. THE STATE OF MADRAS & OTHERS (S. R. DAS c. J., BHAGWATI, B. P. SINHA, SuBBA RAO and K. N. WANCHOO, JJ.) E'undamental Right-Reasonable restrictions-Statute regulating buying and selling of commercial crops-Constitittional validity- Madras Commercial Crops Markets Act (Mad. XX of r933)- Constitution of India, Arts. r9(r)(g) and r9(6). The Madras legislature enacted the Madras Commercial Crops Markets Act for providing satisfactory conditions for the gro\vers of commercial crops to sell their produce on equal terms with the purchasers and at reasonable prices. The Act. Rules and the Bye-laws framed thereunder have a long term targef of providing a net work of markets wherein facilities for correct weighment are ensured, storage accommodation is provided, and reliable market information is given. Till such markets are established the Act provides for the imposition of licensing restrictions<to enable the buyers and sellers to meet in licensed premises. After the establishment of the markets no licenses would be issued within a reasonable radius from the markets and all growers will have to resort to the markets for selling their crops. The result would be to eliminate, as far as possible, the middlemen and to give reasonable facilities for the growers of comni.ercial crops to secure best prices for their commodities. Held, that the impugned provisions of the Act impose reasonable restrictions on the citizen's right to do business an<l are \Yalid. Such a statute cannot be said to create unreasonable restrictions on the citizen's right to do business unless it is clearly established that' the provisions are too drastic, unnecessarily harsh and over-reach the object for which they were made. Chintaman Rao v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, [1950] S.C.R. 759 and State of Madras v. V. G. Rao, [1952] S.C.R. 597, refer- red to. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeals Nos. 169-171 of 1955. Appeals from the judgment and order dated July 10, 1953, of the Madras High Court in Writ Petit.ions Nos. 75, 87 and 135 of 1953. R. Ganapathy Iyer and Shanmugavel, for the appel- ~~ . V. K. T. Chari, Advocate-General for the State of Madras, V. V. Raghavan and R. H. Dhebar, for the respondents. (1) S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 93 H. N. Sanyal, Additional Solicitor General of India a.nd R. H. Dhebar, for Intervener No. 1 M.C. V.S. T. M. Sen, for Interveners Nos. 2 and 3. Arunachala J.Vadar Et6. S. B. Sen, Additional Government Advocate for the State of Madhya Pradesh and I. N. Shroff, for Inter- vener No. 4. 1958. October 6. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SuBBA RAO J.-These three appeals by certificate granted by the High Court are directed against the common order of the High Court of Judicature at Madras, dated July 10, 1953, dismissing three writ petitions filed by the appellants impugning the validity of the provisions of the Madras Commercial Crops Markets Act (Mad XX of 1933), hereinafter referred to as the Act, and the Rules framed there- under, and certain notifications issued by the first respondent herein in pursuance thereof. The Act was passed to provide for the better regu- lation of thi:i buying and selling of commercial crops in the State of Madras ar.d for that purpose to esta- blish markets and make Rules for their proper administration. On May 18, 1951, the titate Govern- ment issued G. 0. No.· 1049 (Food & AgriculturP Department) extending the provisions of the Act to Ramanathapuram and Tirunelveli Districts in respect of cotton and groundnuts. On February 25, 1952, the State Government issued G. 0. No. 251 (Food & Agri- culture Department) ordering the constitution of a Market Committee at Koilpatti and Sankarankoil in Tirunelveli District. By a similar G. 0., viz., G. Q. No. 356 (Food & Agriculture Department) dated March 8, 1952, the Government directed the constitu- tion of a Market Committee at Virudhunagar and markets at (1) Virudhunagar; (2) Rajapalayan and (3) Sattur in Ramanathapuram District. The Market Committees were duly constituted, and, on January 9, 1953, the Market Committee at Virudhunagar issued a notice stating that the Act and the Rules had come into force in Ramanatbapuram District on January l, 1953, and requiring persons who did business in cotton v. The State of .U adras & Other.; Subba Rao]. 94 SUPREME
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.