https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272560 Cotton, treated as an essential commodity, could be subjected to temporary trading restrictions under the Cotton Control Order, 1950, because controlled hedging and limits on normal trading were regarded as reasonable regulatory measures to curb speculation and market instability; the Article 19(1)(g) challenge therefore failed. The selective exemption in favour of the East India Cotton Association, Bombay, did not violate Article 14 because that association had established experience and working conditions, while the petitioner was not shown to be similarly situated on an equal footing. The constitutional challenge accordingly failed, and the impugned orders were sustained. en-us Mon, 25 Jan 1954 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 May 2018 14:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272560 Cotton, treated as an essential commodity, could be subjected to temporary trading restrictions under the Cotton Control Order, 1950, because controlled hedging and limits on normal trading were regarded as reasonable regulatory measures to curb speculation and market instability; the Article 19(1)(g) challenge therefore failed. The selective exemption in favour of the East India Cotton Association, Bombay, did not violate Article 14 because that association had established experience and working conditions, while the petitioner was not shown to be similarly situated on an equal footing. The constitutional challenge accordingly failed, and the impugned orders were sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 25 Jan 1954 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272560