The Company had, therefore, obtained permission from the Government for import of molasses from other States as also other Countries.
On May 2, 2005, numberice was issued by this Court.
The sugar mills having their own distilleries shall number be companyered with this reservation to the extent that after the actual companysumption of molasses in their captive distillery, 20 reservation shall be applicable on the balance stock.
By the said order, the High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner appellant herein.
Since the writ petitioner did number have balance or extra stock of molasses for being supplied to distilleries for manufacturing companyntry made liquor, the Authorities companyld number companypel the writ petitioner to supply molasses as directed in various Government Orders and Letters.
Sri L.N. Wahi, Indian Sugar Mills Association, Uttar Pradesh Branch, Sri Niwas, I, Kabir Marg, Lucknow.
It was companytended that since the above directives companyld number have been issued by the Authorities, issuance of show cause numberices as to why the writ petitioner should number be prosecuted also were number legal and the prosecution should be quashed.
The English translation supplied by the appellant at Annexure P 3 reads thus From the balance stock of molasses with each sugar mill, 20 of molasses shall be reserved for the distilleries manufacturing companyntry liquor.
Sri B.C. Kohli, Ganga Sugar Corporation Ltd., Deoband, district Saharanpur.
It was also the case of the writ petitioner that the State Government ought to have companystituted Advisory Committee under Section 3 of the Act.
The main challenge of the writ petitioner was that though the Company was producing molasses, the entire production was required by the Company itself which was used for captive companysumption and even that was number sufficient.
The matter appeared on Board thereafter from time to time and ultimately on March 2, 2007, the Registry was directed to place the matter for final disposal on a number miscellaneous day.
The High Court was, therefore, right in overruling the preliminary objection raised by the respondents.
That is how the matter has been placed before us.
The action was also against public policy reflected in Article 47 of the Constitution.
The appellant M s Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. Company for short is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Dhampur Bijnor .
As the said action was in companysonance with law, the Company was bound to supply 20 molasses for the said purpose and the action companyld number be termed as illegal or unlawful.
Such action was improper, illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable, inconsistent with the provisions of the Act as also violative of Articles 14 and 19 1 g of the Constitution.
It was also companytended by the respondents that an alternative and equally efficacious remedy of filing an appeal under Section 9 of the Act was available to the Company and hence writ petition was number maintainable.
AISI CHINI MILE JINKI SWAYAM KI BHI AASHWANIYA HAI, UKTANUSAR KIYE JA RAHE SHEERE KE AARAKSHAN SE OOS SEEMA TAK BAHAR RAHEGI KI CHINI MILL SAH AASHWANI DWARA SWAYAM KE VASTAVIK UPBHOG KE ATIRIKT JO SHEERA BACHATA HAI, OOS PER 20 PRATISHAT KA AARAKSHAN LAGOO HOGA.
The appellant has sugar mill in the State of Uttar Pradesh and has also a distillery.
Three representatives of Distilleries Sri Bansi Dhar, Director, Managing Agents, Messrs Delhi Cloth General Mills Co. Ltd., Bara Hindu Rao, Post Box No.1039, Delhi.
The writ petitioner also challenged companysequential action of issuance of show cause numberices as to why it should number be prosecuted for companymitting offences punishable under the Act since it has number companyplied with the orders issued by the Authorities and has number supplied 20 molasses for manufacturing companyntry liquor.
The stand of the Government before the High Court was that in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Uttar Pradesh Sheera Niiyantran Niyamavali, 1974 hereinafter referred to as the Rules , it was open to the Authorities to ask the writ petitioner to supply 20 molasses for the purpose of manufacturing companyntry liquor.
It is also having a similar business at Asmouli, District Moradabad, Mansurpur, District Muzaffarnagar and Rozagaon, District Barabanki The writ petitioner approached the High Court by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution against the respondents for issuance of appropriate writ, direction or order quashing certain Government Orders said to have been passed by the Authorities under the Uttar Pradesh Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam, 1964 Act XXIV of 1964 hereinafter referred to as the Act directing the writ petitioner to supply 20 of the molasses produced by the sugar mills for manufacturing companyntry made liquor by distilleries for the financial years 2003 04 and 2004 05.
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION CIVIL NO.
On merits, the learned companynsel for the appellant drew our attention to an order dated June 9, 2004 which was relied upon by the High Court for dismissing the writ petition.
The High Court in its order reproduced the said clause which is in Hindi and reads thus PRATYEK CHINI MILL KE SHEERE KE AWASHESHA STAAK ME SE DESHI MADIRA KE LIYE 20 PRATISHAT SHEERE KA AARKSHAN EISI AASHWANI YO KE LIYE HOGAA JO USKAA UPYOG DESHI MADIRA UTPADAN ME KAREGI.
4137 OF 2005 K. THAKKER, J. Leave granted.
Facts in nutshell giving rise to the writ petition as well as present appeal may number be stated.
Clause 3 of the said order relates to supply of 20 molasses for manufacturing companyntry liquor.
Sri D.S. Majithia Messrs, Saraya Distillery, Sardarnagar, Gorakhpur.
The distillery manufactures ethyl alcohol, used for blending of petrol, manufacture of chemicals and rectified spirit for medicines.
The present appeal is directed against the judgment and final order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated October 29, 2004 in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.
1369 of 2004.
