TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (1) TMI 205
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eal No. 7509-7510 of 2005, Civil Appeal No. 150 of 2007, Civil Appeal No. 2664 of 2007, Civil Appeal No. 4026 of 2009, Civil Appeal No. 4024 of 2009, Civil Appeal No. 4025 of 2009, Civil Appeal Nos. 4014-4023 of 2009, Contempt Petition (C) No. 169 of 2006 in C.A. No.7508/2005, Contempt Petition (C) No.253 of 2007 in C.A. No.7508/2005, Contempt Petition (C) No. 254 of 2007 in C.A. No.7508/2005, Civil Appeal Nos. 3911-3912 of 2009, Civil Appeal No. 3925 of 2009, Civil Appeal Nos. 3996-3997 of 2009, Contempt Petition (C) Nos.263-264 of 2008 in C.A. Nos.3996-3997/2009, Contempt Petition (C) Nos.265-266 of 2008 in C.A. Nos.3996-3997/2009, Contempt Petition (C) Nos.267-268 of 2008 in C.A. Nos.3996-3997/2009, Civil Appeal No. 4764 of 2009, SLP(C) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The relevant paragraphs from pages 422, 433 and 434 of the Tika Ramji's case are reproduced as under: "... ... ...Even the power reserved to the State Government to fix minimum prices of sugarcane under Chapter V of U.P. Act I of 1938 was deleted from the impugned Act the same being exercised by the Centre under clause 3 of Sugar and Gur Control Order, 1950, issued by it in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 3 of Act XXIV of 1946. The prices fixed by the Centre were adopted by the State Government required under rule 94 was that the occupier of a factory or the purchasing agent should cause to be put up at each purchasing centre a notice showing the minimum price of cane fixed by the Government meaning thereby the Centre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der, 1954, provided that the price was to be the minimum price to be notified by the Government subject to such deductions, if any, as may be notified by the Government from time to time meaning thereby the Central Government, the State Government not having made any provision in that behalf at any time whatever. ... ... ..." 3. It has been specifically held in Tika Ramji's case that there was no power to fix a price for sugarcane under the U.P. Sugarcane Act or rules and orders made thereunder. 4. It is also submitted by the appellants that even if such a power had existed under Section 16 of the U.P. Sugarcane Act, even then such power would be totally repugnant to the power of the Central Government to fix the minimum price under c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Tika Ramji and U.P. Cooperative Cane Unions Federations's cases. 7. In our considered view, there is a clear conflict in the aforementioned judgments of the Constitution Benches. It may be pertinent to mention that almost every year a spate of petitions are filed before the Allahabad High Court and thereafter before this Court on similar issues and questions of law. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it is imperative that the conflict between these judgments be resolved or decided by an authoritative judgment of a larger Bench of this Court. 8. The learned counsel for the appellants in one voice asserted that these cases be referred to a larger Bench so that at least in future the parties would have benefit of a clearer en....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the legislative competence for the State? 6) Whether the power to fix the price of sugarcane is without any guidelines and suffers from conferment of arbitrary and uncanalised power which is violative of Articles 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India? 10. We are conscious of the fact that ordinarily a Bench of three Judges should refer the matter to a Bench of five Judges, but, in the instant case since both the aforementioned conflicting judgments have been delivered by the Constitution Benches of five Judges of this Court and hence this controversy can be finally resolved only by a larger Bench of at least seven Judges of this Court. 11. Recently, a three-Judge Bench of this court in Mineral Area Development Authority and ot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AP of the relevant crushing seasons. In other words, in all those cases where the sugar factories and other buyers have not paid the balance outstanding principal amount to the cane growers or to the cooperative societies because of the stay orders obtained by them from this Court or from the High Court, they are now directed to pay the balance outstanding principal amount according to the SAP as fixed by the State Government from time to time. All the stay orders granted by this court or by the High Court are modified/vacated in the aforesaid terms. Let the balance outstanding principal amount be paid by the sugar factories within three months from the date of this judgment. 14. In case the balance outstanding principal amount, as direct....