Madhya Pradesh High Court
Saurabh Mishra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 January, 2016
Author: P.K. Jaiswal
Bench: D.K. Paliwal, P.K. Jaiswal
1
WP (PIL) No.2213/2015
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE
D.B.: Hon'ble Shri P.K. Jaiswal
Hon'ble Shri D.K. Paliwal, JJ.
Writ Petition (PIL) No.2213/2015
Saurabh Mishra s/o Ramkishor Mishra
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh & another
Writ Petition (PIL) No.2408/2015
Subodh Mishra s/o Vijay Shankar Mishra
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh & another
Writ Petition (PIL) No.2411/2015
Gaurav Panchal s/o Gokul Panchal
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh & others
Writ Petition (PIL) No.2472/2015
Rajendra Kumar s/o Babulal Sanghvi
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh & another
*****
Shri N.K. Maheshwari, learned counsel for the petitioner
in Writ Petition (PIL) No.2213/2015.
Shri C.K. Raikwar, learned counsel for the petitioner in
Writ Petition No.2408/2015.
Shri Amit Kumar Panchal, learned counsel for the
petitioner in Writ Petition (PIL) No.2411/2015.
Shri Pradeep Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the
petitioner in Writ Petition (PIL) No.2472/2015.
Shri Sunil Jain, learned Additional Advocate General with
Shri C.S. Ujjainiya, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent / State.
*****
2
WP (PIL) No.2213/2015
ORDER
(Passed on this 25th day of January, 2016) Per P.K. Jaiswal, J.
This order shall govern disposal of Writ Petitions (PIL) No.2213, 2408, 2411 and 2472 of 2015. For the sake of convenience, facts are taken from Writ Petition (PIL) No.2213/2015.
2. By these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, who are practicing advocates, are challenging the order dated 25.03.2015 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.2, Collector / Authorized Officer, Indore in exercise of the powers conferred under Clause 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Motor Spirit & High Speed Diesel Oil (Licensing and Control) Order, 1980 and directed the petrol pump owners, who are dealers of Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (HPCL) that no petrol/diesel shall be supplied to the two wheelers unless and until they wear helmets, failing which, action will be taken against them under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
3. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with the Government of India, Ministry of Industry and Civil Supplies (Department of Civil Supplies and Co-operation) order No.S.O.681(E) dated 30th November, 1974, the State Government for maintaining supplies and for securing 3 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 availability at fair price of motor spirit and high speed diesel oil in the State of Madhya Pradesh framed the Madhya Pradesh Motor Spirit & High Speed Diesel Oil (Licensing and Control) Order, 1980 (herein after referred to as "Order 1980"). The notification was published in Madhya Pradesh Gazette (Extraordinary) dated 11.04.1980. Regulation 2 (a) and 2 (i) of Order 1980 deals with the definitions "Authorized Officer" and "Licensing Authority", which reads, as under: -
"2. Definitions. In this order, unless the context otherwise requires, -
(a) "Authorized Officer" means the Secretary to Government of Madhya Pradesh in the Department of Food and Civil Supplies and includes such other Officer or Officers as may be authorized by him by notification in the official Gazette to exercise the powers and perform the functions of an authorized officer under this Order;
(b) .....
(c) .....
(d) .....
(e) .....
(f) .....
(i) "Licensing Authority" means the
Collector of the District having
jurisdiction over the area in which a dealer carries on his business and shall include any such officer as the State Government may by notification, appoint in this behalf to exercise all or any of the powers of the licensing authority under this Order for any area specified therein."
4. Regulation 3 of Order 1980 deals with sale and 4 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 supply of motor spirit and high speed diesel oil. As per Clause (5) of Regulation 3 of Order 1980, every dealer and every oil company shall comply with such directions, as may be given to him in writing by the Authorized Officer in regard to purchase, sale or storage for sale of oil and in regard to the language and the manner in which account thereof shall be maintained and also in regard to the submission of stock returns. As per Regulation 4 of Order, 1980, no person shall carry on business as a dealer in oil except under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence issued in this behalf by the licensing authority.
5. The Commissioner, Food & Civil Supplies & Consumer Protection Department has issued directions to the District Collectors on 19.03.2015 to implement the order of compulsory helmet wearing by invoking Clause 10 of the Order, 1980 and directed all the Collectors to issue necessary instructions that the petrol pump dealers must distribute the petrol to the two wheelers only if they wear helmets. The persons, who are not wearing helmets, the dealers were restricted from distributing the petrol to the two wheeler riders. The directions issued by respondent No.1 to the District Collectors on 13th / 19th March, 2015 (Annexure R/1), which reads, as under: -
"[kkn~; ukxfjd vkiwfrZ ,oa miHkksDrk laj{k.k lapkyuky;] ^^?k"[k.M] foU/;kpy Hkou] Hkksiky&e/;izns'k dzekad7399@[kkn~;@2015 Hkksiky] fnukad 13 ekpZ] 2015 19@03@2015 5 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 izfr] leLr dysDVj] e/;izns'k A fo"k; %& isV~zksy@Mhty iEiksa ls gsyesV yxkus okys nks ifg;k okgu pkydksa dks isV~zksy iznk; djus ckor~ A mijksDr fo";kUrxZr ys[k gS fd gekjs ns'k esa lM+d nq?kZVukvksa esa izfr feuV ,d O;fDr dh vlkef;d ekSr gks tkrh gS] tcfd pkj O;fDr xaHkhj :i ls ?kk;y gks tkrs gS A fo'o LokLF; laxBu ds vuqlkj gekjs ns'k esa dqy gksus okyh ekSrksa esa lM+d nq?kZVukvksa ls gksus okyh ekSrksa dk nloka LFkku gS A lM+d nq?kZVukvksa ls Hkkjrh; vFkZO;oLFkk dks ldy ?kjsyw mRikn ds yxHkx 3 izfr'kr rd uqdlku gksrk gS A fcuk gsyesV yxk, okgu pykus ds dkj.k vf/kdka'k nks ifg;k okgu pkyd nq?kZVukvksa ds f'kdkj gksrs gS A ,sls nks ifg;k okgu pkydksa dh gsyesV yxk, fcuk gh okgu pykus dh izo`fRr ij l[rh ls jksd yxkbZ tkuk vko';d gS] ftlds fy, eksVj Oghdy ,DV] 1983 ds fofHkUu izko/kkuksa ds varxZr dk;Zokgh dh tkrh gS A lkFk gh] ;g Hkh vko';d gS fd eksVj flifjV rFkk gkbZLihV Mhty vkW;y ¼vuqKkiu rFkk fu;a=.k½ vkns'k] 1980 dh /kkjk 10 ds varxZr leLr isV~zksy@Mhty iEiksa ds vuqkfIr/kkfj;ksa dks vknsf'kr fd;k tk, fd nks ifg;k okgu pkydksa }kjk gsyesV yxkdj okgu ysdj vkus ij gh mUgs isV~zksy iznk; fd;k tk, A mDrkuqlkj tkjh fd, tkus okys vkns'k dk mYy?kau vko';d oLrq vf/kfu;e] 1955 dh /kkjk 3@7 ds varxZr n.Muh; vijk/k gksxk A ¼lqyHk lanHkZ gsrq dysDVj Hkksiky }kjk tkjh vkns'k dh Nk;kizfr layXu½ A nks ifg;k okgu pkydksa dks mDr tkudkjh gsrq isV~zksy@Mhty iEiksa ds ifjlj esa bl izdkj dh lwpuk ds cMs+&cM+s v{kjksa esa csSuj yxk, tk,a A mijksDr funsZ'kksa dk dM+kbZ ls ikyu lqfu'pr djk;k tk, A layXu %& mijksDrkuqlkj A gLrk-@& vk;qDr 6 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 [kkn~;] ukxfjd vkiwfrZ ,oa miHkksDrk laj{k.k] e/;izns'k] Hkksiky"
6. Due to increase in unavoidable road mishaps, respondent No.2 the District Collector being the responsible officer for looking after the day to day administration from all the perspectives of the District, issued an order dated 25.03.2015 in exercise of powers conferred to him under Clause 10 of the Order 1980 and directed all the petrol pump owners / dealers that no petrol / diesel shall be supplied to the two wheelers unless and until they wear helmets; failing which, action will be taken against them under Section 3 / 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
7. It is this action, which is impugned in this writ petition on the ground that the Licensing Authority has no power under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 to issue directions that the petrol pump owners, who are dealers of Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (HPCL), that no petrol/diesel shall be supplied to the two wheelers unless and until they wear helmets; failing which, action will be taken against them under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
8. It is submitted that the aforesaid restriction amounts to an unreasonable restriction within the meaning of Article 19 (1) (G) of the Constitution of India and is in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
7 WP (PIL) No.2213/20159. To support the aforesaid contention, they have drawn our attention to Section 3 (1), (2) and (5) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Regulations 3, 4 and 10 of the Order 1980 and submitted that the impugned order dated 25.03.2015 (Annexure P/1) issued by the District Collector, Indore be quashed.
10. Per contra, Shri Sunil Jain, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents has submitted that in compliance to the order issued by the Government of Madhya Pradesh, the Authorized Officer / Licensing Authority / Director is fully competent to issue such directions / order by invoking powers vested to them under Clause 10 of the Order, 1980. He submitted that due to increase in unavoidable road mishaps, an urge was felt by the respondents to implement the order for wearing helmets which would certainly decrease the rate of mis- happening occurring on account of non-wearing of helmets. It is contended that the sole intention of the respondents was of better safety while riding two wheelers on roads to safe guard interest of the public in general and particularly the persons who are riding motorcycles and to save their life, this restriction has been imposed by respondent No.2. The action of respondent No.2 is in consonance with the law and it does not exceed the jurisdiction vested to him and prayed for dismissal of the writ petitioner.
11. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties at length.
8 WP (PIL) No.2213/201512. Clause 3, 4 and 10 of Madhya Pradesh Motor Spirit & High Speed Diesel Oil (Licensing and Control) Order, 1980 reads, as under: -
"3. Regulation of sale and supply of motor spirit and high speed diesel oil. - (1) Every dealer shall display a stock-cum-price board at a prominent place of his business premises showing the opening balance of oil of the day and the sale price per litre.
(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-clause (5) no dealer having stocks of oil at his business premises shall, without sufficient cause, refuse to sell oil to any customer on any day during working hours or compel any customer to purchase any other article as condition of sale of oil.
Explanation - (i) The possibility of obtaining a higher price at a later date shall not be deemed to be a sufficient cause for the purpose of this sub-clause.
(ii) For the purpose of this sub-clause, the expression "working hours" means the working hours observed by the dealer immediately prior to the commencement of this order.
(3) Every dealer shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that he has adequate stocks of oil at his business premises at all times.
(4) Every dealer shall maintain true and correct accounts of purchase, sale and storage of oil at his business premises, to be written up at the end of each day, showing: -
(a) the opening stock of the day;
(b) the quantity received during the day;
(c) the quantity sold, delivered or otherwise disposed of during the day;
(d) the closing stock of the day; and
(e) such other particulars as an authorized
officer may, by order in writing, specify. (5) Every dealer and every oil company shall comply with such directions as may be given to him 9 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 in writing by the authorized officer in regard to purchase, sale or storage for sale of oil and in regard to the language and the manner in which account thereof shall be maintained and also in regard to the submission of stock returns. (6) No dealer shall act in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of oil in Madhya Pradesh.
(7) No person, other than a dealer or an oil company, shall sell oil to a user and a user shall not draw his requirement of oil except from a dealer or an oil company.
4. Licensing of dealer. - (1) No person shall carry or business as a dealer in oil except under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence issued in this behalf by the licensing authority.
(2) Every person who is engaged in the business as a dealer in oil at the commencement of this order shall obtain a licence within a period of thirty days of such commencement.
10. Compliance of the direction. - The licensee shall comply with any direction that may be given to him from time to time by the authorized officer or the licensing authority or the Director as the case may be by general or special order in writing in regard to purchase sale and storage for sale and disposal of oil."
13. Section 3 (1), (2) and (5) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, reads as under :-
"3. Powers to control production, supply, distribution, etc. "of essential commodities :
(1) If the Central Government is of opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do for maintaining or increasing supplies of any essential commodity or for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices, or for securing any essential commodity for the defence of India or the efficient conduct of military operations, it may, by 10 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 order, provide for regulating or prohibiting the production, supply and distribution thereof and trade and commerce therein;
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the powers conferred by sub-section (1), an order made thereunder may provide-
(a) for regulating by licences, permits or otherwise the production or manufacture of any essential commodity;
(b) for bringing under cultivation any waste or arable land, whether appurtenant to a building or not, for the growing thereon of food-crops, generally, or of specified food-crops, and for otherwise maintaining or increasing the cultivation of food-crops generally, or of specified food-crops;
(c) for controlling the price at which essential commodity may be brought or sold;
(d) for regulating by licences, permits or otherwise the storage, transport, distribution. disposal, acquisition, use or consumption of any essential commodity;
(e) for prohibiting the withholding from sale of any essential commodity ordinarily kept for sale;
(f) for requiring any person holding in stock, or engaged in the production, or in the business of buying or selling, of any essential commodity :-
(a) to sell the whole or a specified part of the quantity held in stock or produced or received by him, or
(b) in the case of any such commodity which is likely to be produced or received by him, to sell the whole or a specified part of such commodity when produced or received by him, to the Central Government or a State Government or to an officer or agent of such Government or to a Corporation owned or controlled by such Government or to such other person or class of persons and in such circumstances as may be specified in the order.
Explanation 1. An order made under this clause in relation to food-grains, edible oilseeds or edible oils, may, having regard to the 11 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 estimated production, in the concerned area, of such food-grains, edible oilseeds and edible oils, fix the quantity to be sold by the producers in such area and may also fix, or provide for the fixation of, such quantity on a graded basis, having regard to the aggregate of the area held by, or under the cultivation of, the producers.
Explanation 2. For the purposes of this clause, "production" with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions includes manufacture of edible oils and sugar;
(g) for regulating or prohibiting any class of commercial or financial transactions relating to foodstuffs or cotton textiles which, in the opinion of the authority making the order, are, or, if unregulated, are likely to be, detrimental to the public interest;
(h) for collecting any information or statistics with a view to regulating or prohibiting any of the aforesaid matters:
(i) for requiring persons engaged in the production, supply or distribution of or trade and commerce in, any essential commodity to maintain and produce for inspection such books, accounts and records relating to their business and to furnish such information relating thereto, as may be specified in the order;
(ii) for the grant or issue of licences, permits or other documents, the charging of fees therefor, the deposit of such sum if any, as may be specified in the order as security for the due performance of the conditions of any such licence, permit or other document, the forfeiture of the sum so deposited or any part thereof for contravention of any such conditions, and the adjudication of such forfeiture by such authority as may be specified in the order;
(j) for any incidental and supplementary matters, including, in particular, the entry, search or examination of premises, aircraft, vessels, vehicles or other conveyances and animals, and the seizure by a person authorised to make such entry, search 12 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 or examination, -
(i) of any articles in respect of which such person has reason to believe that a contravention of the order has been, is being, or is about to be, committed and any packages, coverings or receptacles in which such articles are found;
(ii) of any aircraft, vessel, vehicle or other conveyance or animal used in carrying such articles, if such person has reason to believe that such aircraft, vessel, vehicle or other conveyance or animal is liable to be forfeited under the provisions of this Act;
(iii) of any books of accounts and documents which in the opinion of such person, may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act and the person from whose custody such books of accounts or documents are seized shall be entitled to make copies thereof or to take extracts therefrom in the presence of an officers having the custody of such books of accounts or documents.
5. An order made under this section, shall, -
(a) in the case of an order of a general nature or affecting a class of persons, be notified in the Official Gazette; and
(b) in the case of an order directed to a specified individual be served on such individual-
(i) by delivering or tendering it to that individual, or
(ii) if it cannot be so delivered or tendered, by affixing it on the outer door or some other conspicuous part of the premises in which that individual lives, and a written report thereof shall be prepared and witnessed by two persons living in the neighbourhood."
14. Full Bench of this Court in the case of Chingalal Yadav v. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2010 (2) MPLJ 443 has held that the Courts cannot interfere with the policy either on the ground that it is erroneous or on the ground that a better fairer or wiser 13 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 alternative is available. Legality of the policy and not the wisdom of the policy is the subject matter of judicial review. The Courts in exercise of their powers of judicial review, do not ordinarily interfere with the policy decision of the executives unless the policy can be faulted with arbitrariness, unreasonableness or unfairness etc.
15. Hon'ble Apex Court has rendered so many judgments, especially in S. Rajaseekaran v. Union of India & others reported in (2014) 6 SCC 36; Ajay Canu v. Union of India & others reported in AIR 1988 SC 2027 and other High Courts mandating the wearing of helmets.
16. Section 129 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is not incorporated in the Act for ornamental purpose by the policy makers and it has been included as a preventive measure to prevent loss of life. There is no use in terming the section mandatory without implementation. Section 129 is made redundant, in spite of inclusion in the statue and Court's direction to the authorities to enforce it. The State is duty bound to safeguard the rights of the citizens by compelling them to wear helmets. Mere imposition of fine for the violation has proved to be of no use. Therefore, the vehicle documents need to be impounded; licence of the rider is required to be suspended and cancelled after enquiry and then only effective implementation is possible. That apart, people need to be sensitized through out India. Media needs to sensitize people through free advertisements.
14 WP (PIL) No.2213/201517. Even penalties and punishments imposed as per Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 are not effective to prevent or reduce the number of accidents. It is common knowledge that the law enforcing authorities are not effectively enforcing traffic laws. The very fact that number of accidents are increasing and correspondingly and the number of lives lost are also increasing, would only go to show that the police is not taking action promptly to enforce the Act. Therefore, the enforcing police authorities are deemed to be responsible for the violation of Section 129 of the Act and accidents and resultant deaths and injuries. As the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as High Courts directed the respondents to implement the provisions of the Act, non wearing of helmet and resultant deaths would be deemed to be contempt committed by the law enforcing agencies, apart from being guilty of abetment under Section 107 of IPC. Similarly, the citizens themselves are to be blamed as they deliberately fail and neglect to follow the Road Rules and take precautions to avoid accidents. Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act mandates the wearing of helmets by the two wheeler riders. The fine amounts of Rs.100/- as punishment for first offence and Rs.300/- for subsequent offences as per Section 177 of the Motor Vehicle Act are palpably very low.
18. The deaths due to non wearing of helmets in Madhya Pradesh has shockingly increased in 2015. The enormous increase in loss of precious lives denotes an extraordinary situation which is required to be addressed 15 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 by unconventional orders traveling beyond provisions of the Act as stated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prithipal Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 1 SCC 10 that while dealing with an unprecedented case, the Court has to innovate the law and may also pass an unconventional order keeping in mind that an extraordinary fact situation requires extraordinary measures. Paragraph-50 of the judgment is usefully extracted as follows:
"50. Extraordinary situations demand extraordinary remedies. While dealing with an unprecedented case, the Court has to innovate the law and may also pass an unconventional order keeping in mind that an extraordinary fact situation requires extraordinary measures. In B.P. Achala Anand v. S. Appi Reddy 42 this Court observed:
(SCC p. 318, para 1) 1. Unusual fact situation posing issues for resolution is an opportunity for innovation. Law, as administered by courts, transforms into justice. Thus, it is evident that while deciding the case, the court has to bear in mind the peculiar facts, if so exist, in a given case. Following the above judgment, in order to meet the unprecedented situation, namely, rise in the number of accidents and loss of lives due to non- wearing of helmets, this Court incidentally issues the required directions to the authorities."
19. When the World Health Organization itself is in favour of wearing of helmets by two-wheeler riders; about 155 countries have mandatory helmet rule and when the law of the land is also in favour of wearing of helmets, there is no escape from the same.
20. It may not be out of place to refer to the report 16 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 given by three member Committee head by Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan appointed by the Honourable Supreme Court, by order dated 22.04.2014, to scrutinize and monitor the enforcement of statutory provisions including the Motor Vehicles Act for making the road safer. The said Committee has held in its report dated 19.08.2015 that unless strong and urgent measures are taken to deal with speeding, drunken driving, red-light jumping, violation of helmet laws and seat belt laws, use of mobile phones while driving and overloading, a number of accidents and fatalities will continue to remain high. The Committee asked the Chief Secretaries of all States and Union Territories to take stern action against violators of law under the provisions of Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, read with Rule 21 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, by passing an order disqualifying the offender from holding the driving licence for a specified period and also by sending to imprisonment wherever it is provided under the law. It also directed that the helmet laws be made applicable all over the country, both for main and pillion riders and suggested two wheeler owners to carry an extra helmet with them. When the Committee constituted by the Hon'ble Apex Court itself has come out with many strong and stringent measures to deal with traffic offences, the directions given by the State Government and District Collector are in consonance with the provisions of law.
21. Wearing of helmet by two wheeler riders in a 17 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 public place is mandatory under Section 129 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The Apex Court also in the case of S. Rajaseekaran v. Union of India & others reported in (2014) 6 SCC 36 directed the Government of each State to effectively implement and enforce all the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act in respect of which, the States have the authority and obligation to so act under the Constitution.
22. It is well established proposition of law that when specific power is conferred, without prejudice to the generality of the general power already specified, the particular power is only illustrative and does not in any way restrict the general power. In the instant case also, The Commissioner, Food & Civil Supplies Department has issued direction to the District Collectors on 19.03.2015 to implement the order of compulsory wearing of helmet by invoking Clause (10) of the Order, 1980 and directed all the Collectors to issue necessary instructions that the petrol pump dealers must distribute the petrol to the two wheelers only if they wear helmets. The persons, who are not wearing helmets, the dealers were restricted from distributing the petrol to the two wheeler riders. The District Collector issued an order on 25.03.2015 in exercise of the powers conferred under Clause 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Motor Spirit & High Speed Diesel Oil (Licensing and Control) Order, 1980 and directed the petrol pump owners / dealers that no petrol/diesel shall be supplied to the two wheelers unless and until they wear 18 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 helmets, failing which, action will be taken against them under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. There is, therefore, no substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the District Collector has no power under the Order of 1980 to issue such type of directions to the petrol pump owners or for that notification is must. There is no doubt that directions issued by the District Collector, Indore on 25.03.2015 (Annexure P/1) are for the benefit, welfare and the safe journey by a person in a two wheeler vehicle. It is difficult to accept the contention of the petitioner that the compulsion for putting on a headgear or helmet by the driver curtails freedom of movement. On the contrary, it helps the driver of a two wheeler vehicle to drive the vehicle in exercise of his freedom of movement, without being subjected to a constant apprehension of a fatal head injury, if any accident takes place. Mere allegation of unreasonableness is not enough to quash the order of District Collector. The order is not violative of any of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution of India.
23. The power to regulate a particular business or calling implies the power to prescribe and enforce all such proper reasonable rules and regulations as may be deemed necessary to conduct the business in a proper and orderly manner; and the power includes the authority to prescribe conditions under which the business may be carried. And a power to regular sale and supply of motor spirit and high 19 WP (PIL) No.2213/2015 speed diesel oil under Section 3 (1) (2) and (5) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with Clause 3 of Order of 1980 include power to prohibit. The word 'regulate' has different shades of meaning depending on the context in which it is used.
24. For all these reasons stated above, the contentions raised by the petitioners are untenable; there is no public interest at all involved and Writ Petition (PIL) No.2213/2015, Writ Petition (PIL) No.2408/2015, Writ Petition (PIL) No.2411/2015 and Writ Petition (PIL) No.2472/2015 are dismissed. No costs.
(P.K. Jaiswal) (D.K. Paliwal)
Judge Judge
Pithawe RC