https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157443 Under the Essential Commodities Act, the general power in Section 3(1) was treated as the source of authority for making restrictive orders, while Section 3(2) was read as illustrative rather than limiting. The delegation under Section 5 validly extended that power to the State Government for foodstuffs, so the ban on transporting paddy outside specified areas was within delegated competence. The term "regulate" was given a wide meaning and, in the context of securing equitable distribution and preventing shortage or inflation, could include prohibiting movement of paddy. The restrictive order was therefore upheld as a valid regulatory measure. en-us Wed, 27 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jan 2017 16:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157443 Under the Essential Commodities Act, the general power in Section 3(1) was treated as the source of authority for making restrictive orders, while Section 3(2) was read as illustrative rather than limiting. The delegation under Section 5 validly extended that power to the State Government for foodstuffs, so the ban on transporting paddy outside specified areas was within delegated competence. The term "regulate" was given a wide meaning and, in the context of securing equitable distribution and preventing shortage or inflation, could include prohibiting movement of paddy. The restrictive order was therefore upheld as a valid regulatory measure. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 27 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157443