https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184418 The Supreme Court considered whether the State could fix fertilizer prices under the Defence of India Act and Rules despite prior Central control under the Essential Commodities Act and the Fertilizer (Control) Order. The majority treated the later Defence of India regime as an additional valid source of power and held that the State notification could operate where the earlier Central notification did not cover old stock held by dealers. It also found no repugnancy or need for Presidential assent on the reasoning adopted, and rejected the Article 14 challenge because discriminatory treatment was not proved. One opinion dissented, taking the view that the special fertilizer control regime excluded recourse to the Defence of India Rules. en-us Mon, 09 Jan 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Dec 2016 18:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184418 The Supreme Court considered whether the State could fix fertilizer prices under the Defence of India Act and Rules despite prior Central control under the Essential Commodities Act and the Fertilizer (Control) Order. The majority treated the later Defence of India regime as an additional valid source of power and held that the State notification could operate where the earlier Central notification did not cover old stock held by dealers. It also found no repugnancy or need for Presidential assent on the reasoning adopted, and rejected the Article 14 challenge because discriminatory treatment was not proved. One opinion dissented, taking the view that the special fertilizer control regime excluded recourse to the Defence of India Rules. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 09 Jan 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184418