From the Judgment and order dated 3 5 1979 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc.
Appeals by Special Leave from the Judgment and order dated S 3 5 1979 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc.
Subsequently, by U.P. Sugar Undertakings Acquisition Act, 1971, U.P. Act 23 of 1971 Act for short , the ordinance was repealed and was replaced.
8050/79.
6146 and 637379.
K. Sen, Manoj Swarup, Mis Lalita Kohli and S. K. Srivastva for the Appellants in CA No.
AND PETITIONS FOR SPECIAL LEAVE To APPEAL CIVIL Nos.
6252/79.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
14 of the Constitution.
6246, 6252, 6373 8050/79.
On the promulgation of 7 the ordinance 11 writ petitions were filed in the Allahahad High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the companystitutional validity of the ordinance and when the Act replaced the ordinance effective from August 27, 1971, the writ petitions were amended incorporating the challenge to the Act also.
Raju Ramchandran and o. P. Rana for the Respondents in All the Appeals.
4150, 4173, 4793 and 442/71.
A. Gupta for the Petitioner in SLP No.
S. Nariman, Bhaskar Gupta, Rajesh Khaitan, Rohington Nariman and P. R. Seethrama for the Appellants in CA 1614/79.
DESAI, J. Acquisition of industrial undertakings involved in manufacturing sugar, a companymodity satisfying the basic necessity, in larger public interest and the attempt of the owners of the undertakings to thwart the same, paints the familiar landscape in this group of appeals.
Writ Nos.
Writ Nos.
was delivered by Desai, J., R. S. Pathak, J. gave a separate opinion on behalf of A. D. Koshal, J. and himself.
4170/71, 4130/71 and 4193/71.
The Judgment of V. R. Krishna Iyer, S. Murtaza Fazal Ali and D. A. Desai, JJ.
Schedule to the Act enumerates 12 sugar undertakings referred to as scheduled undertakings and by the operation of s. 3, these scheduled undertakings stood transferred to and vested in the Corporation from the appointed day, i.e. July 3, 1971, the date on which the ordinance was issued.
1614, 1652 and 1637 of 1979.
Lal Narain Sinha Att.
in C.A. 1614.
19 1 f and g of the Constitution The Act infringed the gurantee of equality enshrined in Art.
Hence these appeals by the original petitioners, the owners of the scheduled undertakings.
As a sequel to the serious problems created by the owners of certain sugar mills in the State of Uttar Pradesh for cane growers and labour employed in sugar mills, having an adverse impact on general economy of the areas where these sugar mills were situated And with a view to ameliorating the situation posing a threat to the economy, the Governor of Uttar Pradesh promulgated an ordinance on July 3, to 1971, styled as U.P. Sugar Undertaking Acquisition ordinance.
N. Sharma and N. N. Kacker for the Petitioner in SLP No.
1652/79 and SLPS.
31 of the Constitution because the acquisition was number for a public purpose and the companypensation proposed in the Act was illusory The Act was in breach of Art.
General, U.P. in C.A. 1652.
