Case Study

PETITIONER: NAGAR RICE & FLOUR MIILLS & ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: N. TEEKAPPA GOWDA & BROS. & ORS. DATE OF mind: 27/02/1970 BENCH: SHAH, J.C. BENCH: SHAH, J.C. HEGDE, K.S. GROVER, A.N. CITATION: 1971 AIR 246 1970 SCR (3) 846 1970 SCC (1) 575 CITATOR selective information : F 1976 SC 578 (50) R 1992 SC 443 (8) ACT: strain mill about Industry (Regulation) Act, 1958 (21 of 1958)- Shifting of existing rice hang around to new site-Prior permission under s. 8 (3) (c) how far necessary-Considerations in giving such(prenominal) permission-Another mill situated near new site objecting that its business would be adversely affected- Objection whether sustainable under Art. 19(1)(g) of Constitutionlocus standi of party making such objection. HEADNOTE: According to s. 8(3)(c) of the Rice Milling Industry (Regulation) Act, 1958, no owner of a rice mill shall without the former permission of the Central Government, change the location of the whole or any part of that rice mill in respect of which demonstrate has been granted under s. 6?.

The lands and buildings of the appellants rice mill in the cite of Mysore were acquired under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 and the award expressly recited that the appellants were empower to remove the machinery of the mill. The appellants were allotted a new site by the Mysore Gov- ernment. After obtaining sanction from the Tehsildar the appellant shifted their machinery to the new site. Thereafter the coach of Food and Civil Supplies in purported exercise, of the delegated powers of the Central Government passed an order under s. 8(3)(c) clear a change in the location of the appellants rice mill. He overruled the objection of the respondents whose rice mill was situated near the new site. The, respondents challenged the order before the... If you fatality to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay

Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.