OSILAAC SOALGI v. STATE OF GUJARAT & Anr.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE Date of decision: 08/08/96 ORAL JUDGEMENT
1.(cid:9)Heard learned counsel for the parties. In this Special Civil Application the challenge has been made by the petitioner to the order annexure `F'. Under the order annexure `F' dated 18th June, 1983 it is mentioned that sodium alginate manufactured by the petitioner firm should be manufactured under the supervision of the department of the second respondent with effect from 10th July, 1983 and that Government's costs (supervision charges) shall be payable by the petitioner firm and same shall be payable every three months in advance.
2.(cid:9)The petitioner firm was carrying on the manufacture of sodium alginate since 1976. Looking to the fact that the petitioner firm desired to use special denatured spirit in the said industry, the licence was granted to it under the provisions of the Bombay Denatured Spirit Rules, 1959. That licence was renewed from year to year and thereafter it was renewed from month to month basis. The petitioner firm was given a show-cause notice when it has failed to implement the provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 and Bombay Denatured Spirit Rules, 1959.
3.(cid:9)In view of this fact, if in case the condition has been put that the sodium alginate should be manufactured by the petitioner firm under the supervision of the department of the second respondent and further to bear the costs of the supervision, then such an order cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary. It seems to be just and reasonable order to enforce the provisions of Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 and Bombay Denatured Spirit Rules, 1959. The petitioner is using the denatured spirit for its manufacturing purpose. The learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to point out any illegality in the order impugned in this Special Civil Application.
4.(cid:9)In the result, this Special Civil Application fails and the same is dismissed. **********
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 08 Aug 1996. The bench was S K KESHOTE.
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.