Whether the Petroleum and Natural Gas authority board is empowered to fix or regulate the maximum retail price at which gas is to be sold by entities to the consumers?
A power cannot be inferred from the rule making power in the absence of any provision to the said effect in the act/statute.
Whether the proviso to Rule 3(1) of the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land Holdings Rules, 1973, as amended by the notification dated 4.4.1986, is ultra vires the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972?
Whether the restriction on the transfer of land supporting tea plantations is arbitrary, unreasonable, and contrary to the purpose of the Act?
Whether the State Government, through delegated legislation, can impose substantive obligations or disabilities not contemplated by the Parent Act?
Delegated legislation must align with the scope of authority granted by the parent statute and cannot override or expand upon its provisions.
A rule made under a statute must fulfil two conditions:
It must conform to the provisions of the enabling statute.
It must fall within the scope of the rule-making power delegated by the legislature.
The legislature cannot delegate its essential legislative functions, including determining core policy matters, to subordinate authorities. Delegation is permissible only for ancillary details necessary to implement the statute’s purpose.
Whether the amendments to the Karnataka Excise Rules mandating that licensees engaged in the manufacture or sale of liquor can sell only to a distributor license holder owned or controlled by the State Government, violate the appellant’s fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution?
Whether the amendment to the Karnataka Excise Rules is beyond the scope of the delegated authority given to the State?
The state has the authority to impose reasonable restrictions on trade, business, and commerce under Article 19(1)(g), as long as such restrictions serve a public purpose and are not arbitrary or discriminatory.
Whether Rule 8-C, which reserves the exploitation of black granite for the State or State-owned corporations, is valid under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, and whether it improperly limits competition in violation of constitutional principles?
Whether the imposition of a royalty on granite stone extracted from quarries in Tamil Nadu by the State violates the constitutional provisions regarding freedom of trade and commerce under Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution?
The State government has the power to make rules and regulations under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, and such power includes the authority to regulate mining activities, even to the extent of creating monopolies for government-run corporations when done in the public interest.
The delegated power must be exercised in alignment with the public interest and within the framework established by the primary legislation.
Rule 8-C of the Tamil Nadu government regulations allows the State to exclusively control the mining of black granite, asserting that public interest justifies such an arrangement.