https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171325 A municipal bye-law requiring permission for a new wholesale market was held, as applied, to impose an absolute prohibition rather than a reasonable restriction, because no operative licensing framework existed and the Board had effectively created a monopoly in favour of one contractor. The refusal of licence was not based on any statutory defect in the premises, and the scheme was found inconsistent with Articles 19(1)(g) and 13(1). The existence of an appeal under the U.P. Municipalities Act did not bar relief under Article 32, because the statutory remedy was not effective in the circumstances. Constitutional relief was therefore granted to protect the right to trade. en-us Fri, 19 May 1950 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Nov 2025 11:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171325 A municipal bye-law requiring permission for a new wholesale market was held, as applied, to impose an absolute prohibition rather than a reasonable restriction, because no operative licensing framework existed and the Board had effectively created a monopoly in favour of one contractor. The refusal of licence was not based on any statutory defect in the premises, and the scheme was found inconsistent with Articles 19(1)(g) and 13(1). The existence of an appeal under the U.P. Municipalities Act did not bar relief under Article 32, because the statutory remedy was not effective in the circumstances. Constitutional relief was therefore granted to protect the right to trade. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 19 May 1950 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171325