State Advised Price conflict referred to larger Bench; interim directions required payment of cane dues with interest on delay.

Conflicting Constitution Bench decisions on the State's power to fix the State Advised Price created a recurring constitutional issue, so the controversy was referred to a larger Bench for authoritative resolution. Pending that determination, sugar factories were directed to pay the outstanding principal to cane growers or cooperative societies at the State Advised Price for the relevant crushing seasons, without prejudice to their challenge to legislative competence. The existing stay orders were modified or vacated to that extent, and delayed payment would attract interest at 18% per annum after the stipulated time.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the conflict between the earlier Constitution Bench decisions on the State's power to fix the State Advised Price warranted reference of the matters to a larger Bench; (ii) whether the sugar factories were liable to pay the balance outstanding principal amount according to the State Advised Price, with interest on default.

Issue (i): Whether the conflict between the earlier Constitution Bench decisions on the State's power to fix the State Advised Price warranted reference of the matters to a larger Bench.

Analysis: The Court noted that one line of authority held that the State Government had no power under the U.P. Sugarcane legislation to fix a price, while the later Constitution Bench decision proceeded on the basis that a higher State-fixed price would not be repugnant to the Central price control regime. As both decisions were Constitution Bench rulings and the conflict affected recurring disputes across the State, the Court found it necessary that the controversy be settled authoritatively by a still larger Bench.

Conclusion: The matters were referred to a larger Bench for authoritative resolution of the conflict.

Issue (ii): Whether the sugar factories were liable to pay the balance outstanding principal amount according to the State Advised Price, with interest on default.

Analysis: Pending final resolution of the larger constitutional question, the Court directed payment of the unpaid principal to cane growers or cooperative societies at the SAP fixed for the relevant crushing seasons. The direction was made without prejudice to the factories' challenge to the State's legislative competence, and the existing stay orders were modified or vacated to that extent. The Court also fixed a time limit for payment and provided for interest on delayed payment.

Conclusion: The sugar factories were held liable to pay the outstanding principal amount according to the SAP within the stipulated time, failing which interest at 18% per annum would become payable.

Final Conclusion: The controversy on the State's power to fix SAP was not finally decided and was sent to a larger Bench, while interim monetary directions were issued requiring payment of the admitted outstanding amounts to cane growers.

Ratio Decidendi: Where authoritative Constitution Bench decisions conflict on a recurring constitutional question, the matter should be referred to a larger Bench, and interim relief may be granted to protect accrued payments without prejudice to the final legal determination.

---