Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(1) These writ petitions (Civil Writs Nos. 1353, 1406, 1501, 1615 and 1826 of 1963) raise the same question of law and are, therefore, being disposed of by one judgment.

(2) In Civil Writ No.1353 of 1963, Shri Mukhtiar Cahnd, Petitioner No. 1 claims to be an ordinary resident of Malout Mandi, District Ferozepore and is by profession a Tolla (weighman) being also a member of the Tolla Mazdoor Union, Malout Mandi (petitioner No. 2 ). He has been earning his livelihood by his profession for the last 8 years. Weighing by hand-scale, according to his allegations, requires 'a special kind of skill and adeptness' which he has been working as a weighmen. The Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act of 1989 (hereinafter called the 1939 Act) "provided for taking out a licensee for carrying out an occupation of a weighman' and the petitioner accordingly took out such licence which has been renewed every year every since. The petitioner has been carrying out his profession as a weighmen with the aid of handscales (Takri). The remuneration fixed by the Market Committee under the 1939 Act for the petitioner No. 1 and for 2 paledars who assisted him in weighing was fixed at 81/2 annas on an out-turn of Rs.100/- It was split as under:

The Market Committee Malout adopted unanimously a resolution on 7-9-1963. The Market Committee-, Karnal did so on 22-8-1963. The Market Committee-, Rayya sanctioned them on 8-8-1963 and the Tarn Taran Committee did so on 19-8-1963 forwarding the same on 7-9-1963. The Market Committee Patti however was more prompt and adopted unanimously the said bye-laws on 27-7-1963. In the resolution of this Committee it also stated that the Board be informed that these bye-laws be notified immediately. The said bye-laws as is clear from a copy of the gazette notification are the subject-matter of a notification shows that the bye-laws were confirmed and notified by the Chairman of the Board under the powers conferred by S.44 and all other powers enabling him in his behalf.

(13) From what has been stated above it is clear that the bye-laws bear the date 9-8-1963 and were actually published on 30-8-1963 long before they were adopted by the Malout Market Committee. They were also issued about 13 days before they were e approved by the Karnal Market Committee. The Rayya Market Committee sanctioned the bye-laws on 8-8-1963 and were apparently forwarded on 13-8-1963 as appears to be suggested from its attestation by the Secretary of this Market Committee. It is the Market Committee of Patti alone which adopted the bye-laws on 27-7-1963 and which may be assumed to have been received by the Chairman of the Board before 9-8-1963-, the date on which they were sent to the press for publication the Tarn Taran Committee having also adopted the bye-laws only on 19-8-1963 and forwarded them on 7-9-1963. In the case of the Market Committee Patti alone therefore it is possible to hold that the bye-laws were adopted before 30-8-1963 as desired and intimation set to the Chairman who confirmed them in accordance with law. No other Committee appears to have approved or adopted the bye-laws and forwarded them to the Chairman for confirmation and enforcement in accordance with law before 9-8-1963 the date of the notification. I regard to that there was no compliance with S. 44(3)(b) with the result that the bye-laws in regard to accordance with law decelerating the power so as OT be of binding effect.