✦ Supreme Court of India

VIRUDHUNAGAR STEEL ROLLING MILIS LIMITED v. THE GOVERNMEl'iT OF MADRAS

Case at a glance

Outcome

Dismissed

petition is dismissed in limine and an orde: is pronounced in that

Judgment

In the present case the petition is clearly barred in view of the decision in Daryan's case('). The learned Single Judge who first dealt with the petition passe\1 a short order dealing with the merits and stating that'l:he validity 'bf s. 12 of the Madras Act could not (1) [1962] 1 S.C.R. 574. 744 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1968) 2 s.c.R. be attacked as the exemption was based on sound principles. He therefore repelled the attack on s. 12 of the Madras Act based on Art. 14 of the Constitution. The petitioner then went appeal to the Division Bench. The order of the Division Bench is more comprehensive than the order of the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench has dealt with the attack under Art. 14 It has rejected the contention that there was of the Constitution. It has also held that there any clement of hostile discrimination. was no arbitrary or unreasonable classification by s. 12 of the It has finally held that it could not be said that Madras Act. there was no nexus between the conditions specified in the Madras Act and the Central Act which seeks, for reasons of national development and· prosperity, to license and supervise undertakings. The order of the Division Rench in appeal is clearly a ing order dealing with the merits of the petition where only ono point under Art. 14 was raised. In our opinion it bars the mak ing of the present petition under Art. 32 op the same facts for the same relief based on the same article of the Constitution. The petitioner did not appeal from the order of the Division Bench. The High Court made a speaking order dealing with the merits of the case and the fact that no notice was issued to the other side before such an order was passed is immaterial in the circum stances. We therefore uphold the preliminary objection. A B c D· We may add that if we were to go into the merits of the case ourselves we would see no reason to differ from the view taken by the Division Bench as to the application of Article 14. E The petition is dismissed with costs. R.K.P.S. Petition dismissed.

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is dismissed in limine and an orde: is pronounced in that

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Consumption Act, 1962; Madras Eectricitv Act — s. 12; Constitution of India — arts. 14, 32.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Supreme Court of India or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 38 of 1967). ← Search more judgments