Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: insecticides act 1968 section 6 other committees Page 16 of about 243,469 results (0.429 seconds)

Pest Control (India) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : (1998)9SCC602

..... writ petition filed under article 32 of the constitution of india are challenging the validity of the notification dated 20-9-1996 issued in exercise of the powers conferred under section 27(2) of the insecticides act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') whereby the manufacture, import and use of heptachlor and chlordane has been prohibited with immediate effect. heptachlor and chlordane are ..... insecticides specified in the schedule to the act. the case of the petitioners is that they had imported basic material, namely heptachlor tech. and chlordane tech. for manufacturing formulations known as heptachlor 20-ec .....

Parmeshwar Singh. Vs. State of Bihar.

Court : Patna

..... and had violated the provisions of insecticides act by selling damaged insecticides.3. after lodging the first information report, the case was investigated and finally chargesheet was submitted under section 409, 420, 468, 471, 418 and 120-b of the indian penal code and section 18 of the insecticides act against nine accused persons including the ..... subsidy to farmers but sale of damaged dithane m-45 was contrary to the insecticides act. the biscomaun did not inform the licencing authority and joint director, plant protection and hence violating the provisions of the act, farmers were supplied with sub standards medicine. it was further alleged that records ..... on the order of agriculture production commissioner, joint director of plant protection, bihar, patna, shri c.s.rai, the informant did physical verification of insecticides of plant protection centre, mainpura. during physical verification, besides the informant shri c.s.rai, d.p.choudhary, assistant director, plant protection, patna, .....

Seelam Koti Reddy Vs. State of A.P. and Another

Court : Andhra Pradesh

..... 7 scc 196) following another decision in state of haryana v. unique farmaid (p) ltd. ((1999) 8 scc 190) which was also a case under insecticides act. in that latter case also, the accused concerned therein made a request to the inspector also concerned therein for sending one of such samples for retesting within the ..... in these appeals have been deprived of their valuable right to have the sample tested from the central insecticides laboratory under sub-section (4) of section 24 of the act. under sub-section (3) of section 24 report signed by the insecticide analyst shall be evidence of the facts stated therein and shall be conclusive evidence against the accused only ..... if the accused do not, within 28 days of the receipt of the report, notify in writing to the insecticides .....

The Fertilizer Wholesale Dealers Welfare Association Rep. by Its Gener ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2009(5)ALT725

..... commodities act, 1955, with an objective ..... rule 10 of the insecticides rules, 1971, framed under the insecticides act, 1968, a learned single judge of this court has held that no separate licenses need be taken for sale points and godowns. so far as the fertilizers are concerned, their regulatory mechanism with regard to sales and purchase is governed by the fertiliser (control) order, 1985, framed under section 3 of the essential .....

Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Prakash Traders

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1987]67STC239(Ker)

..... .pesticides are classified according to the type of organisms they attack; for example, substances that kill insects are known as insecticides; agents that kill fungi are known as fungicides.(encyclopedia americana, vol. 21, page 656)as per section 31 of the insecticides act, 1968, insecticide is defined to include any substance specified in the schedule. copper-sulphate is an item listed in the schedule for the ..... purpose of section 3(e) of the act. the appellate tribunal has also stated that the order issued by the government of kerala .....

WisconsIn Pub. Intervenor Vs. Mortier

Court : US Supreme Court

..... it does not. page 501 u. s. 601 i a fifra was enacted in 1947 to replace the federal government's first effort at pesticide regulation, the insecticide act of 1910, 36 stat. 331. 61 stat. 163. like its predecessor, fifra as originally adopted "was primarily a licensing and labeling statute." ruckelshaus v. ..... subdivisions, and regulatory authority, which it expressly delegated to the "state[s]" alone. the provisions on which he relies, however, undercut his contention. section 136t(b), for example, mandates that the epa administrator cooperate with "any appropriate agency of any state or any political subdivision thereof, in carrying out ..... field, and that certain provisions, including 136v(a), reopened certain portions of the field to the states, but not to political subdivisions, is unpersuasive. section 136v itself undercuts any inference of field preemption, since 136v(b) prohibits states from enacting or imposing labeling or packaging requirements that conflict with those required .....

The Superintendent, Central Prison, Fatehgarh Vs. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohi ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1960SC633; 1960CriLJ1002; [1960]2SCR821

..... inconsistent with article 19(1)(a) of the constitution on the 26th january, 1950.' question no. (ii). 'the restrictions imposed by section 3 of the u.p. special powers act, 1932, were not in the interests of public order.' in the usual course the matter was placed before the two learned judges who first heard the ..... a third judge, who agreeing with desai, j., gave the following answers to the questions referred to him : question no. (i). 'the provision of section 3 of the u. p. special powers act, 1932, making it penal for a person by spoken words to instigate a class of persons not to pay dues recoverable as arrears of land revenue, was ..... communication may be made directly, or indirectly and (x) shall be punished with imprisonment or with fine or with both. under this section a wide net has been cast to catch in a variety of acts of instigation ranging from friendly advice to a systematic propaganda not to pay or to defer payment of liability to government, any authority or .....

Seeds Man Association, Hyderabad and ors. Vs. Principal Secretary to G ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2004SC1690; JT2004(2)SC247; 2004(2)SCALE385; (2004)9SCC56

..... for regulating sale of seeds of notified kinds and varieties. besides the aforesaid enactment, the central government has in exercise of power conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act made the seeds (control) order, 1983, which provides for licensing of dealers in seeds, besides appointment of inspectors and taking of samples ..... lots and losses at processing are returned to farmers only after the foundation seeds are certified as conforming to specifications, the lots are subjected to treatment with insecticides (cell phose, quick phose) and pesticides (thiram and barastin) at the time of packing. the company had filed certificates issued by the seeds certification ..... by such producer to ensure the quality of the seeds is not disclosed. similarly, there is no clear averment that on account of application of insecticides or chemicals and poisonous substances, the basic character of the article, namely, its consumption as food by human beings or animals is irretrievably lost and .....

Shukal and Sons Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

ram chand gupta, j.1. the present petition has been filed by m/s shukal and sons under section 482 of code of criminal procedure for quashing of complaint under section 3(k)(i), 17/18/21/29/30 and 33 of the insecticides act, 1968 and rules 1971 framed thereunder.2. i have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole ..... that the same is fully covered by the decision of this court, annexure p3.6. hence, in view of these facts, the present petition is accepted and the complaint under section 3(k)(i), 17/18/21/29/30 and 33 of the insecticides act, 1968 and rules 1971 framed there under alongwith all consequential proceedings arising there from, is, hereby, quashed.

Mysore Agro Chemical Company Private Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India ...

Court : Guwahati

..... assertions deserve to be minuted. introducing itself to be a private limited company incorporated under the companies act, 1956, the petitioner has averred that it is registered as well under section 9(4) of the insecticides act, 1968 (hereafter referred to as the act) as a manufacturer of different insecticides including different types of solvents (xylene, cyclohexanone, apromax etc.) and emulsifiers (snt a, snt b etc). the ..... make their offers. the edifice of this argument is built on the provisions of the act and the rules on the supposition that bionol or cardol/cardonol is an insecticide as comprehended by these legislations. insecticide has been defined in section 3(e) of the act, as hereunder.3(e)... insecticide(i) any substance specified in the schedule; or(ii) such other substances (including fungicides and .....