Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

17. The argument of Sri Shanti Bhushan, Senior Advocate can be examined from other angle also, namely in the light of structure/ design and inter relationship of various Entries in List I, II and III of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. Entry 24 of List II relates to industries subject to the provisions of Entries 7 and 52 of List I. There are further entries namely Entry Nos. 26 and 27 in List II of Seventh Schedule. Entry 26 is a field for legislation on the subject of trade and commerce within the State, subject to the provisions of Entry 33 of List III. Entry 27 is a field for enactment on the subject of production, Supply and Distribution of goods subject to the provisions of Entry 33 of List HI. It is not disputed that the State Legislature is competent to enact law on the subject 'Industries' subject to Entries 7 and 52 of List I of Seventh Schedule. If the State has to make further law on trade and commerce and production supply and distribution of goods, it would be referable to Entry 26 and 27 of List II of Seventh Schedule. This shows that trade and commerce within the State and production, supply and distribution of goods are not implicit in the subject 'industries' which is Entry 24 of List II. However, if the Parliament passes an Act under Entry 52 of List I declaring that certain industry is a controlled industry then the contents of Entry 24 of List II stand transferred to Entry 52 of List I denying the State. Legislature power to enact law on the subject to the extent control of such industry has been assumed. If the Parliament has to make law on trade, commerce in and production, supply and distribution of products of industries where the control of such industries is declared by the Parliament to be expedient in the public interest and price control, then the field of Legislation is to be found in Entries 33 and 34 of List III of Seventh Schedule. The Entry 52 itself is not a field of Legislation of Parliament on subject of trade and commerce in and supplies and distribution and production of the controlled industries. If the argument of counsel for the petitioner is accepted most of Entries in List II and List III would be meaningless. Once Parliament makes a declaration under Entry 52 of List I, for instance Entries 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 which deal with economic and social planning, commercial and industrial and labour disputes, social security and social insurance, welfare labour including provident fund etc. respectively would be redundent. Neither it was the intention of the framer of the Constitution, nor the said contention is born out from the perusal of Entry 52 and the other Entries of List II and III of Seventh Schedule.

If the matters has stood there, the sugar industry being a controlled industry, legislation with regard to the same would have been in the exclusive province of Parliament and production, supply and distribution of the product of sugar industry, viz., sugar as a finished product would have been within Entry 33 of List 3. Sugarcane would certainly not have been comprised within Entry 33 of List 3 as it was not the product of sugar industry which was a controlled industry. It was only after the amendment of Entry 33 of List 3 by the Constitution Third Amendment Act, 1954 that food-stuffs including edible oil-seeds and oils came to be included within that list and it was possible to legislate in regard to sugarcane, having recourse to Entry 33 of List 3.
This being the position, it cannot be said that the legislation which was enacted by the Centre in regard to sugar and sugarcane would fall within Entry 52 of List I. Before sugar industry became a controlled industry, both sugar and sugarcane fell within Entry 27 of List 2 but after a declaration was made by Parliament in 1951 by Act 65 of 1951, sugar industry became a controlled industry and the product of that industry, viz. sugar was comprised in Entry 33 of List 3 taking it out of Entry 27 of List 2. Even so, the Centre as well as the Provincial Legislatures had concurrent jurisdiction in regard to the same.
"....... Then we have the expression 'industry' in Entry 52 of List I, Entry 24 of List II and Entry of List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. The said expression in these entries does not include trade or commerce of distribution of goods which are found elsewhere in the said Lists. What is of significance is that in List II 'hospitals and dispensaries' are specifically referred to in Entry 6 and they cannot, therefore, possibly fall under Entry 24 thereof which refers to 'industries'. As observed by this Court in Ch. Tika Ramji v. State of U.P., 1956 SCR 393 at p. 420 : (AIR 1956 SC 676 at p. 695) 'industry: in the wide sense of the term would be capable of comprising three different aspect: (1) raw materials which are an intergral part of the industrial process, (2) the process of manufacture or products of the industry. But raw materials are dealt with by Entry 27 of List II, the process of manufacture or production by Entry 24 of List II except where the industry is a controlled industry when it would fall under Entry 52 of List I and the products of the industry would fall under Entry 27 of List II except where they are products of controlled industry when they would fall under Entry 33 of List III."