Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal against a prosecution for contravening a notification fixing maximum prices for iron and steel under the Iron and Steel (Control of Production and Distribution) Order, 1941. The appellants, a husband and wife, were charged with selling iron bars above the controlled price. They contended that the notification was ultra vires and discriminatory, violating Article 14 of the Constitution, and that the police report did not meet the requirements of Section 11 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946. The Supreme Court examined the legality of the notification and the validity of the prosecution. It held that the notification was within the powers conferred by the Control Order and did not discriminate against any class of stockholders. The court found that the police report adequately set out the facts constituting the offence, allowing the Magistrate to take cognizance. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the validity of the notification and the prosecution.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Ultra Vires - Validity of Notification - Iron and Steel (Control of Production and Distribution) Order, 1941, Clause 11-B - The notification fixing maximum prices was held to be intra vires as it included all relevant categories and did not exclude any producers. The court found no merit in the argument that the notification was discriminatory or ultra vires the powers of the Controller (Paras 563-574). B) Constitutional Law - Discrimination - Article 14 of the Constitution - The differentiation between 'controlled stockholders' and 'registered stockholders' was not deemed discriminatory as it did not constitute unfair or irrational discrimination. The court emphasized that differentiation does not equate to discrimination (Paras 574-576). C) Criminal Procedure - Cognizance of Offences - Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946, Section 11 - The court upheld the validity of the police report, stating it sufficiently set out the facts constituting the offence, thus allowing the Magistrate to take cognizance of the case (Paras 577-578).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the notification fixing maximum prices was ultra vires and whether the prosecution was valid under the Essential Supplies Act.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the validity of the notification and the prosecution under the Essential Supplies Act.
Law Points
- Ultra vires
- Discrimination
- Cognizance of offences
- Essential Supplies Act
- Control Order
- Article 14
- Article 19(1)(g)
