HIGH COURT OF CHHATTI§GARH AT BIQSPUR DNISION BENCH Coram :- Hon’ble Shri Vijay Kumar Shrivastava & Hon’ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra, JJ. Writ Petition No.5381 of 2006 Durg Sahkari \flpnan Samiti Maryadit, Du/rg & omen Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others And Five Other Connected Writ Petitions Order for qogsiderg‘on a / $ ' Sd/- V.K.Shriyastava i Judge Hon’ble Shri Dhrinendra Mishra, J W \ X 5d]- Dhirendra MiShl‘a ,7 WW: i: Sdl— V Vijay Kumar Shrivastava Judge HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DMSION BENCH Coram :- Hon’ble Shri Vijay Kumar Shrivastava & Hon’ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra, JJ. Writ Petition No.5381 of 2006 1. Durg Sahkari Vipnan Samiti Maryadit, Durg, through im President Yashwant Kumar Harmukh. S/o Late Shri Kanhaiyalal Harmukh, Aged about 66 years, Rio District Durg (CG). 2. Balod Vipnan Sahakari Samiti, Baiod, Through iis President Mohan Lal Patel, S/o Late Shri Udayram Patel, Aged about 59 years, R/o District Durg (CG). 3. Sahkari \flpnan Samiti Maryadit, Bemetara, Through its President Manager Vijay Singh Bhuwal, Slo shyam Singh Bhuwai, Aged about 52 years, R/o District Durg (CG). Kishan Sahkari Wpnan Samiti Maryadit, Gundardehi. through its‘ Assistant Godown Keeper. Doman Singh Markande, S/o Parsariram Markande, Aged about 5O years, R/o District Durg (CG). 5. Vipnan Sahkari Samiti Dondi Lohara. Through its Manager Puranik Ram Sonwani, S/o Bn'j Lal Sonwani, Aged about 38 years, R/o Distn‘c't Durg (CG). 6. Sahkari Vipnan Samiti Maryadit, Gurur, Through its Accounmnt Visnuram Sahu, Slo Udayram Sahu, Aged about 52 years, Rio District Durg (CG). 7. Vipnan Sahakari Samiti Maryadit. Dhamdha, Through its Assistant Manager, Surendra Singh Rajput, 3/0 Shri Bahadur Singh, Aged about 48 years, Rio District Durg (CG); Petitioners : 8. Vlpnanz Sahakati Samm, Patan, Through its Assistant. Manager Beldhar Prasad. Sahu, Slo Shri Sukhdev Ram Sahu, Aged abaut 32 years, Rlo District Ding (CG); Adatsh Vipnan sahaMri Samiti Matyadit, Dondi. Through IS Assistant Manager J.B, Singh Churendra, Slo Sampat Lal Churendra, Aged about 30 years. R/o District Durg (CG). Durg Jila 'Thok Upbhokm Bhandar Maryadit, Durg, Through its Upper Division Clerk Rajendra Kumar Tamrakar, Slo Horilai Tamrakar, Aged about 45 years, R/o District Durg (CG). . Bhllai Thok Upbholda Bhandar. Bhiiai, Through k Godoiwn Incharge Rajendra W Tiwari. s/o Chandra ‘She‘khar Tiwari. Aged about 46 years, R/o District Durgi i (CG). Versus 1. Respondents :V Siataof Chhattisgarh', Through: the Drincipai Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supplies.. D.K.S Bhawan, Mantraiaya, Raipur (CG). 2. Chhatiisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation, Through Managing Director. Bal Aashram Parisar. Kachhari Chowk, Raipur (CG). District Manager,.chh‘attisgarh State} Civil Supplies Corporatien Limited, District Durg (CG). Cooperative Societies, State of Chhaitisgarh, District Raipur (CG). The’Coileetor. Durg (CG). 5. Preeente- Shri Kanak Tiwari, Sr. Advocatewith Shri Matin Siddique; counsel for the petiu‘oners; Shri Prashant Mishra, Addl. Advocate General. for the State/respondents No.1. 4 & 5. shri V.R. Tiwari, counsei for respondents No.2 & 3. _ Registrar. \ ' . r . Domendra Singh Bhedia, Slo Late Khilendra Bhedia, Agad about 56 years, Former Chairman - Kendriya Jila sahkari Bank Maryadit, Durg, Rio Balod, District Durg (CG). Versus 1. State cf Chhattisgarh, Through: the Principal Secretary, Department 0f Food and Civil Supplias, D.K.S. Bhawan; Mantralaya. Raipur (CG). 2. Chhatiisgarh State Civil $upplies Corporation, Through Managing Director, Bal Aashram Parlsar. Kachhari Chowk, Raipur (CG). Petitianer : 3. District Manager, Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited. ' Durg, District Durg (CG). 4. Collector (Food and Civil Supplies), Durg, District Durg (CG). Present :- Shri Manindra Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate with Shri Amrito Das, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Prashant' Mishra, Addl. Advocate General for the State/respondents No.1 8: 4. Shri V.R. Tiwari. counsel for respondents No.2 & 3. Writ Petition Nq.227§ of 3906 1. Durg Marketing Cooperative Society Ltd., Durg, A Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of the M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Societies Act. 1960 vicle registration No.529, through Chairman Yashwant Kumar Harmukh, Aged about 65 years Slo Late Shri K.L. Harinukh, 'Rio Dhamdha Naka, District Durg (CG). Petitioners: Dhamdha Marketing Cooperative Society Ltd., Dhamdha, A Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of Ste M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 vide registation J.» 1 No.0R/DRG/51. through Chairman Baburam Chanda}, Aged about 53 years, S/o Late Shri DR. ChandeL Rlo Main Road, Dhamdha. District Durg (CG). .Gurur Marketing Cooperative Society Ltd., Gurur, A Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of the M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 vide registration No.DR/DRGI54, through Wshnu Ram Sahu, Aged about 52 years, Slo Late Shri U.R. Sahu, R/o Gurur Marketing society, District Durg (CG). .Balod Marketing Cooperative Society Ltd., Balod. A Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of the M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 vide registration No.$31. through Manager U.R. Sahu. Aged about 48 years, Slo Shri Gajadhar Ram Sahu, Rio Balod, District Durg (CG). . Dondi Lohara Marketing cooperative Society Limited, A Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of the M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Societies Act. 1960 vide registration No.07, through Manager PR. Sonwani, Aged about 38 years, Slo Shri Brijial Sonwani, Vipnan Sahkari Samiti, Dondi Lohara, District Durg (CG). . . Cooperative Marketing Society. Ltd., Manendragarh, District Koriya, A Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of the M.P.(C.G) Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 vide registration No.BR- ESP/02, through Manager Prakash Kumar Sinha. Aged about 53 years. S/o Late Shri Laxmi Prasad, R/o Purani Basti, Manendragarh, District Korea (CG). Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: the Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supplies. D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Ram'LCIG). Respondents : ‘2.. i DD Present :- The Collector, Durg (CG). The Sub Divisiona! Omcer, Manendragarh, District Koriya (CG). The Food Officer, District Koriya (CG). Shri Kanak Tiwari. Sr. Advocate with Shri Matin Siddique, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Prashant Mishra, Addl. Advocate General for the State/respondents No.1 to 4. w_rit Petition No.6530 of 2096 Paralkot Comparative Marketing Society Ltd., Though : Subhash Sarkar, S/o Late Shri Shailesh Sarkar, Aged about 52 years, Member of Paralkot sahkari Vipnan Sanstha Maryadit, Pekhaniom; Kanker. District Kanker (CG). Nani Gopal Biswas, S/o Shri Shared Biswas, Aged about 45 years, Working as Salesman in the Paralkot Sahkati Vlpnan Sanstha, Maryadit, Pakhanjote, Kanker. Disttict Kanker (CG). 1. State of Chhattisgarh. Through: the Secretary Department of Food and oivu' Su’ppiies,' D.K.s. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG). The Coilector, District Kanker (CG). The Sub Divisional Ofiicer (Revenue),. Pakhanjur, District Kanker (CG). The Food Officer, District Kanker (CG). Present :- Shri Kanak Tiwari, Sr. Advocate with Shri Matin Siddique. counsel for the petitioners. Shri Prashant Mishra', Addi. Advocate General for the State/respondents No 1 to 4 Versus 1 . 4. Writ Petition No.5281 of 2096 Petitioner: Sarangarh Sahkari Vipnan Samiti Maryadit, Sarangarh, District Raigarh (CG). * Through its Manager Shaligram Patel, Slo Goverdhan Patel Aged abaut 30 years, R/o village Dharmabhata, Post Gudheli, Tahsil Sarangarh. District Raigarh (CG). Versus 1. State of Chhatiisgarh. Through: the Principal Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supplias. D.K.$. Bhawan, Mantralaya. Ralpur (CG). 2. Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation, Through Managing Director. Bal Aashram Parisar, Kachhari Chowk, Raipur (CG). 3. District Manager, Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, District Raigarh (CG). 4. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, State of Chhattisgarh, District Raipur (CG). 5. The Collector Raigarh (CG). Present :- Shri Kanak. Tiwari, Sr. Advocate with Shri Matin Siddique, counsel for the petitioner Shri Prashant Mishra. Addl. Advocate General for the‘ State/respondents No.1 , 4 & 5. Shri V.R. Tiwari, counsel for respondents No2 8‘3. Sunder Prathmik Upbhokta Sahakari Bhandar Maryadit, Ward No.22, Sunder Nagar, Camp — 1, Bhilai. District Durg. (CG). Through : Manager Laxmi Narayan Agrawal, S/o Shri Ram Kumar Agrawal, Aged about 30 years, R/o Indira Chowk, Supela, Bhilaiistrict V Durg (CG). , . Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: the Principal Secremry, Department of - Food and Civil Supplies, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG). 2. Chhattisgarh Slate Civil $upplies Corporation, Through Managing Director, Bal Aashram Parisar, Kachhari Chowk, Raipur (CG). 3. District Manager, Chhattisgarh Smte Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, District Durg (CG). 4. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, State of Chhattisgarh, District Raipur (CG). 5. The Collector, Durg, District Durg (CG). Respondents : Present :- Shri Parag Kotecha. counsel for the petitioner. Shri Prashant Mishra, Addl. Advocate General for the State/respondents No.1, 4 & 5. Shri V.R. Tiwari, counsel for respondents No.2 & 3. ORDER (Delivered on 9 “z March, 2007‘) The following order of the C'ourt was delivered by Vijay Kumar Shrivastava, J. All these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of tndia relate to challenge the validity of policy decision for transportation of food grains to fair price shops which abstains marketing societies or consumer stores to carry both the works together of lead agency and fair price shops. Constitutional validity of imposition of condition whereby maximum limit of three fair price shops has been incorporated in Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2004 (for short "Order 2004") for allotment of shops to various agencies. issuance of public notice inviting tenders by the State Civil Supplies Corporation l,td., for transportation of food grains, {‘C} (“k/in} 9 , and vires 0f clausa 9(1)(2)(3)(4) of the Order, 2004 as substituted Vida notmcation dated 21-3-2006. Having common questions ior decision a“ these petitions are taken together, and are being disposed of by this common order. 2) The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (fov short, “the Act, 1955”) has been enacted by the Union of India with the object of equiuble distribution and suppiy of essentiai commodities to the pubiie at large. On being delegated the state is also competent to enact such statutory orders under Section 3 of the Act, 1955 for attaining the avowed purposes of the Act, 1955 including distribution of essential commodities to the ration card holders of public at large through fair prise shops. For the first time, erstwhile state of M.P. enacted M.P. Foodstuffs Distribution (Control) Order, 1960 (for short, "order 1960) under vlmich Government fair price shops were established to run by appointment of retailers. ln the year 1981 State of MP. framed a scheme known as M.P. (Foodstuffst Civil Supply Public Distribution Scheme 1981 (for short, “Scheme 1981) whereby allowed preference in 'allotment of fair price shops to Co-operative Societies. in order to achieve the objectives, the Registrar, Co—operative Societies, M.P., vide circularforder dated 02/05/1981 fixed criteria of Co-operative Societies who would be eligible to run the fair price shops and thereby authorized Primary Credit Co-operative Societies and, their branches, Large Aadimjati Multipurpose Co-operative Societies (LAMPS), Marketing Co-operative Societies and their branches and Wholesale Consumer Co-operative Societies and their branches. Pursuant to it, fair price shops were withdrawn fromathe private individuals and aiiotted to meseAsggietiesJ/' 3) Pursuantto Scheme, 1981, the Registrar, Cmpemtlve Societies. issued a we“ considered circular No. 6152/4?36/29I2I81. data 12-084981 and started a new scheme of appomtingthaleadsoelety which society would undemke mensk'ofrraceivingessential eommaditiesw r at par and on behalf of the fair price $heps and waulwfurtherr’store‘andr VA suppiy such commodities to the fair price shops. Primary Co-operative Marketing Societiesewere selected and to promote theirwerk, they were ‘. accorded financial assistance. Some of he Primary Co-operawe Credit. .; Societies were also appointed as. lead society to perfoml the said work, The societies authorized with work of lead agency continued their work uninterruptedly sinceiong. 4) In the year 2001 another scheme called as Chhettisgarh Public Distribution System (Control) Scheme 2001 (for short, "the Scheme 239.1”) ; was enforced and private individuals were also inducted in the business. In the year 2004 State of Chhattisgarh enacted-the sututory order known as Chhattisgarh Pubiic Distribution System (Conti'o!)Order 2004(for short “Control Order 2004") and that was enforcedfrom ’23i1212004“ Someof the provisions were brought‘witl'iinth’e’dlmenslon-ofscruh'ny by the judiciai V review and this Court by a common order in the case of Raghuveer ‘ Singh Gond Vs. Union of india and others in W.P.No.445i2005, declared some of the provisions as ultrarvires and also issued certain directions. ln consonance with those observations and directions, the ‘ State of Chhattisgarhin order to revalidate the law amended the relevant , provisions vide amendment order No. F 13-8IFoodI20M129, Raipur, date 21 -03-2006. 5) This Court in Raghuveer‘Singh-Gondisupra) deciared atlotmentw‘ of fair price shops to Primary Credit Cooperative Societiesuitra \n'res and y d 10 funher directed that only those out of other Cooperative Societies can be allotted fair price shops under the Order 2004 :which are permM under the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, “the Act, 1960") or Chhattisgarh Swayam Sahakeriia Adhinryam. 1999. to run the fair price shops, but the State vide amendment did not reotifythe defect in tote, on the omer hand. imposed a ceiling of maximum of three shops to be allotted to any authorized agency. 6) On 08/1 1/2005 a meeting under the Chairman-ship of Secretarys Department of Food & Civii’Supplies. was convened-Wherein it was delibera’tedrethat where ail kinds of institutions would fail inciuding the Chhattisgarh' State Civil Supplies Corporation (for short; “the Corporation"), then such lead agencies’ work may be got executed by the MarketingyCo-operative Societies and by no other societies. Pursuant to it and amendment brought in Control Order, 2004, the authorities started asking the Marketing Societies who are carrying both the works Let, lead agency work as well as fair price shop to choose either of themand also started asking to select only mree fair price shopsrif may have more than that also Government and authorities issued circular, letter and order in“ consonance with policy and amended provisions. 7) Feeling aggrieved with the amendment incorporahd, vide notilication dated 21/03/2006 whereby Primary Credit Co;operativ¢¢=w Societies have been allowed to ccntinuerunning the fair price shops and Primary AgriculturerCredit Societies have been authorized as agencies to run fair price shops, the ceiling of maximum of three fair price shops the policy decision taken by the State which curtailed the lead agency work of Marketing Society and to compel them to opt either to do the work of lead agency or to do the work of fair pricejhop, validit/yof all these . 11 rules/directions and amendment iiself have been questioned, with a further relief that suitable direction be issued to respondent/State nof to formulate any policy with regard to Public Distribution System or essential commodities for purposes of any statutory order made or otherwise contrary to judicial sanction and time tested policy of the State to deploy the services of the Comperative Societies as lead societies; 8) Respondents opposed the petition, inter alia, on the ground that the State Government is the sole depository for framing policies in public interest for proper and effective distribution of essential commodities to the fair price shops so that it may ultimately reach to the hands of persons entitled for it. State is also empowered and authotized to regulate iw own » policy and to make addition/alteration and also to completely change the policy for the above stated purpose and object. The policy decision unless is absurd or is violative of any constitutional provision or is wholly improper and irrational to the extent that the policy cannot be interfered with by the Courts. 9) Marketing societies have been chosen to work as lead agency only by executive orders because of their proximity to the godowns in which essential commodities are stored. They have no legal right to trade any t essential commodities meant for distribution through fair prices shops. State cannot be directed not to frame public policy in a particular manner. it is the duty of the State Govemment to make the essential commodities timely available in the fair price shops for distribution to ration card holders, but the involvement of multiple agencies for lifting the food grains from Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Centers to Fair Price Shops creates unnecessary delay in supply of foodgrains to fair price shops for that reason State decided to provide foodgrains tojair price or“ “via 12 (4&1 .1‘,’ shop through dcor step delivery by Chhattisgarh State Civi! Supplies Corporation and accordingly issued necessaiy instructions. The implementation of public distribution system needs constant monitoring and desired changes, if necessaty, based upon the experience of the State Govemment to ensure timely supply of foodgrains to the fair price shops for onwards distribution to the ration card holders. Public dwtribution system requires change in policy sometimes by way of necessity and sometimes for experiment to evolve a better mechanism to achieve the object. Thus to achieve excellence in implementation of Public Distribution System (for short “PDS") continuous reforms is needed, therefore. no individual or society can claim any fundamental or statutory right to continue to in the PDS and its allied sphere. 10) By adopting door etep delivery system the Government is trying to eliminate one intermediary and to hand over the work carried out by lead agencies to a Government owned statutory Corporation who shall be solely responsible for distribution of essential commodities to the Fair price shops without requiring the shopkeepers to make payment of the value of the articles in advance. This can only be done when a Government agency is made responsible for del'wery. Earlier to 1985 in absence of nodal agencies, cooperative societies were appointed as lead agencies for distribution under PDS. The supply of foodgrains by Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation to fair price shops under door step delivery system will reduce the involvement of multiple agencies and ensure time supply of PDS commodities to fair price shops. Timely availability of foodgrains for public distribution at Fair price shops. level is the best guarantee against its diversion. /“-r 11) The Govemment of India is regularly insisting the sates to mite pro-aciive steps to curb leakages and diversion of fcodgrains meant for PDS. Vide letter dated 4-10-2006 Government of India has instrucwd aii the State Governments to ensure door step delivery of foodgrains to fair price shops and to avoid diversion or any malpractices. For streamlining the PDS, Government of India instructed that the number of intermediaries should be kept to the minimum. Therefore, the State Government has decided to remove the multiple agencies involved for transportation of foodgralns to fair prices shops. Door step delivery of foodgrains will be carried out by the Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation. For online tracking the movement of vehicles engaged in the transporhtion of PDS foodgrains Global Positioning System (for short “GP5") device will be used. Normally delay in supply of foodgrains occurs due to late payment of the amount of foodgrains by the Fair Price Shops to the Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation. To overcome this problem State Government has decided to supply foodgrains to fair price shops in advance by the Corporation 'without waiting for the payment by the shopkeepers. 'The State Government has right to select and appoint any agency as lead agency for timely and smoothiy suppiy of foodgrains to fair price shops as an administrative and policy decision, therefore, the marketing societies or other societies cannot ciaim for lead agency work as their fundamental rights. The amendment of Ordet, 2004 issued vide notitioation dated 21-3-2006 is within the legisiative competence of the Government of Chhattisgarh. The State Government has power to limit the maximum number of three fair price shops. which can be allotted to any agency. mentioned in the Order. 2004. ‘ 14 12) , Petitioners contention is that the decision taken in a meeting is not a delegated Iegislation and cannot be termed as a decision of the State in public poiicy. Even otherwise the said decision does not fali within the ‘ limb of public policy. ln order to support their centention, they relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the matter of Ashok Lanka and another vs. Rishi Dixit and others, reported in (2005) 5 SCC 598. Para 55 of the judgment reads as below: "55. The Commissioner of Excise issued a circular letter dated 14-2-2005 which power evidently he did not possess in terms of Section 7 of the Act. Although the State may delegate its power to the Commissioner of Excise. such a delegation cannot be made in relation to the matters contained in the rule— making power of the State. The matters which are, therefore, outside the purview of the Rules only could be the subject-matter of delegation in favour of the Commissioner of Excise. The Commissioner of Excise is a sututory authority. He‘ is bound to exercise his power only within the four corners of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder and not dehors the same.“ He further relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Rajasthan and others vs. Basant Nahata, reported in (2005) 12 SCC 77. Para 66 of the judgment reads as below: "66. The contention raised to die effect that this Court would not interfere with the policy decision is again devoid of any merit. A legislative policy must conform to the provisions of the constitutional mandates. Even otherwise a policy decision can be subjected to judicial review. (See Cellular Operators Assn. of India v. Union of indie and Clariant International Ltd. v. Securities & Exchange Board of lndia.)" 13) g Leamed counsel for the petitioner further contended that circuiar issued by administrative authorities against the operation of me smtutory rules has no force and therefore, the circular issued by the authorities herein asking the marketing societies to opt either of theitwgbusinesses d Le. Iead agency or fair price shop and to select three fait price shops is illegal. He relied on the judgment'of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Jagannath Achyut Karandikar, reported in 1989 Supp (1) scc 393, Para 7 ls quoted below : “7. The aforesaid Rules expressly provided power to the Govemment to grant more chances for passing the examination in any individual case or in class of cases. Under the 1955 Rules. the Government preserved power to dispense with, or relax the requirements of any rule regulating “the conditions of service of Government servants; or of any class thereof’. In the exercise of this power, the Government could dispense with or relax the operation of any rule, if it causes undue hardships ln any particular case. lt is needless to state that this power includes the power to relax the conditions prescribed for promotion since promotion is a condition of service. There is no restriction as to the exercise of the power or discretion. The High Court, however. has observed that the scope of this power has been constrained by the circular dated 15-1-1962. The circular states that the 1955 Rules permitting relaxation cannot be utiiized to relax the rules which regulate conditions of service. lt further states that the scope of the Rules should be limited only to matters relating to traveling allowance. leave, etc. But this appears to be an exercise in vain. The circular is an executive instruction whereas the 1955 Rules are statutory since framed under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution. The Govemment could not have restricted the operation of the statutory rules by issuing the executive instruction. The executive instruction may supplement but not supplant the statutory rules. The High Court was in error in ignoring this well—accepted principle." 14) Learned counsel for the petitioners canvassing preferential criteria in favour of co-operah've societies contended that for lead agency business societies are entitled for preference and also societies cannot be restricted to opt reaming maximum number of three shops and ptaoed his reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble the supreme Gourt in the case of Madhya Pradesh RationrVikreta Sangh Society and others vs. state of Madhya Pradesh and another, twin “9&4 S96 535, the Court held thus : 16 “QC “The wider concept of equality befare the law and the equal protection of laws is that there shall be equality among equals. Even among equals there can be unequal treatment based on an intelligible differentia having a rational relation to the objects sought to be achieved. However, if govemmental action disclosed arbitrariness. it would be liable to be invalidated as offending against Article 14. Consumers’ cooperative societies form a distinct class by themselves. Benefits and comessions granted to them ultimateiy benefit persons of email means and promote social justice in accordance with the directive principles. There is an intelligible differentia between the