9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
The legality of the State Advised Cane Price and the authority to fix the minimum cane price. Judgment Summary: Issue 1: Legality of State Advised Cane Price The petitioners sought to restrain the State Government from announcing any State Advised Cane Price. A previous Division Bench judgment highlighted that the State Advised Cane Price is deemed illegal due to the absence of statutory provisions allowing the State Government to fix it. The Central Government is the designated authority to fix the minimum cane price as per the U. P. Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966. The Supreme Court also supported this stance in an interim order, emphasizing the lack of statutory basis for the State Government to determine the State Advised Cane Price. Despite these rulings, the State Government continued to disregard the judgments, prompting the High Court to intervene and stay the operation of the order fixing the State Advised Cane Price. Issue 2: Authority to Fix Minimum Cane Price The Court noted that the decisions cited by the respondents did not address the crucial question of whether there exists a statutory basis for setting the State Advised Cane Price. The contention that only the Central Government, under Clause 3 of the U. P. Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966, has the power to establish the minimum cane price remained unchallenged. Additionally, a previous decision of the Court, which was stayed by the Supreme Court, further supported the exclusive authority of the Central Government in fixing the minimum cane price. Consequently, the State Government was directed to refrain from determining the State Advised Cane Price until further orders, aligning with the legal precedents established by the High Court and the Supreme Court.
|
