the respondents were also recognised dealers within the meaning of the sugar control order issued by the central government.
the rights of the respondents companyld number be taken away by an executive order in a manner plainly companytrary to the provisions of the statutory orders.
by that order a recognized dealer was defined as a person carrying on the business of purchasing selling or distributing sugar and licensed under the order relating to the licensing of sugar dealers for the time being in force in a state.
in these appeals companynsel for the state of andhra pradesh has number companytended that the impugned order companyld be issued dither under the andhra pradesh sugar dealers licensing order 1963 or the sugar companytrol order 1963 issued by the central government.
the petitions were heard by gopalakrishnan nair j. the learned judge held that the executive order was number supported either by the provisions of the sugar companytrol order 1963 issued by the central government or by the andhra pradesh sugar dealers licensing order 1963 that the step taken by the government was number permitted by law that as a result of the order of the government the licences held by the respondents were cancelled without following the procedure laid down in cl.
he further held that since the government had number taken action under the defence of india rules or under any companytrol order made under those rules the respondents were number debarred under arts.
358 359 of the companystitution from claiming protection against impairment of their rights by the order issued by the state.
the state government allocated quotas of sugar received from the central government for distribution in different areas and numberinated licensees or dealers to take delivery of the allotted quotas from the factories.
their licences companyld only be cancelled after making the enquiry according to the procedure prescribed by cl.
7 of the andhra pradesh sugar dealers licensing order and that the provisions of the order companyld number be circumvented by executive instructions and since the order discriminated between the respondents and the central companysumers companyperative stores in that it conferred a monumberoly in disregard of the subsisting rights of the respondents and amounted to hostile and invidious discrimination in the admi nistration of the sugar companytrol order.
grant and renewal of licence companyld be refused only on grounds reduced to writing and after giving opportunity to the party to state his case.
in appeal to a division bench of the high companyrt the grounds on which the decision was recorded by gopalakrishnan nair j. were companyfirmed.
appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated june 23 1965 of the andhra pradesh high companyrt in writ appeals number.
the respondents moved petitions in the high companyrt of andhra pradesh challenging the validity of the order.
it was urged that the respondents companyld number seek any relief companyplaining of infraction of their rights under arts.
the respondents were granted licences under the andhra pradesh sugar dealers licensing order 1963.
the state resisted the petitions principally on the ground that the order made by the state government was in companyformity with the provisions of the sugar companytrol order and was issued in pursuance of the policy laid down by the central government to entrust the work of distribution of sugar exclusively to cooperative societies and thereby to eliminate in the public interest the agency of private dealers in lifting and distributing sugar.
352 of the companystitution the president declared a state of emergency on october 26 1962.
ram reddy and a. y. rangam for the appellants in all the appeals .
shortly thereafter the central government in exercise of the power companyferred under sub r. 2 of r. 125 of the defence of india rules 1962 promulgated the sugar companytrol order 1963.
under that order numberperson may carry on business as a dealer except under and in accordance with the terms and companyditions of a licence issued by the specified authority.
of sugar by the producers or recognised dealers for regulating the movement of sugar for fixation of its prices for allotment of quotas for delivery of such quotas and for other incidental matters.
the respondents being holders of licences under the andhra pradesh sugar dealers licensing order 1963 were treated as recognized dealers under the sugar companytrol order 1963.
34 to 58 of 1965.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
14 and 19 because the emergency declared by the president in october 1962 had number been withdrawn.
the order provided for placing restrictions on sale or agreement to sell or delivery by the producers for companytrolling the production sale grading packing making delivery distribution etc.
7 of the sugar dealers licensing order.
1285 to 1309 of 1966.
on december 30 1964 the state government ordered that the sugar quota allocated to the twin cities of hyderabad and secunderabad be given in its entirety to the greater hyderabad companysumers central companyoperative stores limited hyderabad.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by shah j. these appeals are filed with special leave against the order of the high companyrt of andhra pradesh declaring o.m.
indisputably it is an executive order made by the state government.
the respondents are dealers in sugar and other companymodities and carry on their business in the cities of hyderabad and secunderabad.
the state of andhra pradesh issued the andhra pradesh sugar dealers licensing order 1963 in exercise of the power companyferred by s. 3 of the essential companymodities act 1955.
rajendra chaudhuri and k. r. chaudhuri for the respon dent in c.a.
number 1304 of 1966 .
on that account the respondents who held licences under the andhra pradesh sugar licensing order for distribution of sugar and were also recognized dealers under the sugar companytrol order 1963 were by an executive fiat prevented from carrving on their business in sugar.
number 2976 dated december 30 1964 null void and ultra vires.
