# M/S INGREVIA LTD v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2025) 3 ILRA 778
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025
- **Case number:** Writ C No. 12502 of 2012
- **Bench:** Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/m-s-ingrevia-ltd-v-state-of-u-p-ors-42445
- **Pages:** 7

## Headnote

A. Criminal Law - Poisons Act, 1919 -
Sections
2,
6
&
8
-
U.P.
Poisons
(Regulation of Possession and Sale) Rules,
1921, Rules 17-B(b), 17-D(d), 17-F -
Possession and sale of Methyl Alcohol
without licence - Held: Rules 17-B and 17D of the 1921 Rules were framed in
exercise of powers under Sections 2 and 8
of the Poisons Act, 1919. Court rejected
the contention of the petitioner that Rules
17-B and 17-D are ultra vires, being
beyond the scope and power of the State
Government. Court held that Rules 17B(b), 17-B(c), and 17-D(d) are within the
scope and power of the State Government
under Sections 2 and 8 of the Poisons Act,

## Text

778 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
carried out by them that has assisted the
Court in coming to its conclusion.

26. As a legal point was involved
in the present writ petition, there shall be
no order as to costs.
----------
(2025) 3 ILRA 778
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 28.03.2012

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J.
THE HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH
DESHWAL, J.

Writ C No. 12502 of 2012

M/S INGREVIA LTD. ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Nikhil Agrawal

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Piyush Shukla

A. Criminal Law - Poisons Act, 1919 -
Sections
2,
6
&
8
-
U.P.
Poisons
(Regulation of Possession and Sale) Rules,
1921, Rules 17-B(b), 17-D(d), 17-F -
Possession and sale of Methyl Alcohol
without licence - Held: Rules 17-B and 17D of the 1921 Rules were framed in
exercise of powers under Sections 2 and 8
of the Poisons Act, 1919. Court rejected
the contention of the petitioner that Rules
17-B and 17-D are ultra vires, being
beyond the scope and power of the State
Government. Court held that Rules 17B(b), 17-B(c), and 17-D(d) are within the
scope and power of the State Government
under Sections 2 and 8 of the Poisons Act,
1919. (Paras 10, 11)

B. Poisons Act, 1919, Sections 2, 6, 8 -
U.P. Poisons (Regulation of Possession
and Sale) Rules, 1921, Rules 17-F and 17H - Confiscation - Held: These rules
provide special provisions in respect of
Methyl Alcohol. Court held that the power
of confiscation under Rule 17-F is not
contrary to Section 6 of the Poisons Act
and is valid. Argument of the petitioner
that Rule 17-F is beyond the scope of
Section 6 of the Poisons Act, 1919,
rejected by the Court. (Paras 13, 14)

C.
The
petitioner
purchased
Methyl
Alcohol from a supplier who did not
possess an M.A.-1, M.A.-2, or M.A.-3
licence. A show cause notice was issued,
and
the
petitioner's
licence
was
suspended - Held: Prima facie, there was
a violation of the provisions of the 1921
Rules - Writ petition was disposed of with
liberty to the petitioner to file an objection
or appeal under Rule 17-I of the Rules,
1921, against the show cause notice.
(Para 15)

Dismissed. (E-5)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh
Deshwal, J.)

1. Heard Sri Nikhil Agrawal, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Sri D.K.
Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing
Counsel for the State.

2. The present petition was
initially filed for quashing the order dated
12.02.2012 passed by District Magistrate
(Licensing Authority) by which the M.A.-4
license of the applicant was suspended for
committing repeated violation of Rule 17D, 17-E, 17-F, 17-G of U.P. Poisons
(Regulation of Possession and Sale) Rules
1921 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules
1921") as well as non-obtaining the license
of M.A.-2 in pursuance of order dated
28.05.2011 with further direction to show
cause why his M.A.-4 license may not be
cancelled. Subsequently, an amendment
was also made in the writ petition with the
3 All. M/S INGREVIA LTD. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
779
permission of this Court dated
12.11.2018, by which vires of Rule 17B(b), Rule 17-D(d), Rule 17-F was
challenged on the ground that the same is
beyond the power of the State Government
under Section 2 r/w Section 6 of the
Poisons Act, 1919.

3. The petitioner is a company that
purchases methyl alcohol to use it for
industrial purposes for which the petitioner
company had also obtained license M.A.-4
as per Rule 17-B(c) of Rules 1921. The
M.A.-4 license permits the license holder to
purchase, possess, use or sell methyl
alcohol for medical, scientific, educational,
industrial or professional purposes. The
inspection was made by the District Excise
Officer,
Jyotibha
Phule
Nagar,
on
20.05.2011 of the premises of the petitioner
wherein certain violations of the Rules
1921
were
found,
which
includes
purchasing the methyl alcohol from nonlicensed unit. Thereafter, a show cause
notice dated 01.06.2011 was issued to the
petitioner,
which
he
replied
to
on
13.06.2011. Thereafter, the District Nodal
Committee, in its meeting dated 11.08.2011
directed the petitioner to take a license in
form M.A.-2. Thereafter, a letter was also
issued on 12.10.2011 directing the petitioner
to obtain M.A.-2 license. The petitioner
challenged the resolution dated 11.08.2011,
the order dated 12.10.2011 as well as the
vires of Rule 17-D of Rules 1921 before this
Court by way of WRIT- C No. 70182 of
2011, which was partly allowed vide order
dated 07.12.2011 by quashing the resolution
dated 11.08.2011 and the order dated
12.10.2011 with further direction to pass a
fresh order after considering the petitioner's
reply dated 13.06.2011. However, the Court
refused to declare Rule 17-D(d) of the Rules
1921, as ultra vires. In pursuance of the order
dated 07.12.2011 passed in WRIT- C No.
70182 of 2011, the impugned order dated
12.02.2012, has been passed, which is under
challenge.

4. The contention of learned counsel
for the petitioner is that it is not in dispute
that the applicant is purchasing and storing
methyl alcohol for use in industrial purposes.
It is not involved in the sale of methyl
alcohol. An M.A.-2 license is for possession
for sale as well as sale of methyl alcohol.
Therefore, the petitioner cannot be directed to
obtain M.A.-2 license. It is further submitted
by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
State, under Section 2 of the Poisons Act,
1919 has power to regulate the possession for
sale as well as sale of any poison. Therefore,
the State cannot frame rules for regulating the
possession of poison for any other purpose
except the sale. Therefore, Rule 17-B(b), 17B(c), 17-D(d) and 17-F of the Rules 1921 are
ultra vires to Section 2 of the Poisons Act,
1919 being beyond the power of the State
Government because the same lies within the
power of Central Government u/s 3 of the
Poisons Act, 1919.

5. Per contra, learned Standing
Counsel
vehemently
opposed
the
contention of learned counsel for the
petitioner and submitted that the petitioner
himself obtained M.A.-4 license under Rule
17-B(c). Therefore, it is bound to follow
Rules 17-B, 17-D and 17-F of the Rules
1921. It is further submitted by learned
Standing Counsel that Section 8 of the
Poisons Act, 1919 gives power to frame
rule in addition to rule making power under
Section 2 except on the subject of rule
making power of the Central Government
under Section 3 of the Poisons Act, 1919.

6.

After
considering
the
submissions of learned counsel for rival
parties and perusal of the record, it is not in
780 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
dispute that the petitioner is M.A.-4 license
holder under Rule 17-B(c) to purchase,
possess, use and sell methyl alcohol for
industrial purposes, and it is also not in
dispute that the petitioner is not involved in
the business of selling methyl alcohol. Rule
17-D of Rules 1921 further imposes a duty
on M.A.-4 license holder to purchase the
methyl alcohol from M.A.-1, M.A.-2 or
M.A.3 license holder. For reference,
Sections 17-B and 17-D of Rules 1921
(existing before amendment made in the
year 2014) are being quoted as under :

17-B. Possession and sale
of Methyl Alcohol without licence
is prohibited-
(a) Any industry in the
State producing Methyl Alcohol as
a by-product shall not sell it except
under a licence granted by the
Licensing Authority in Form M.A.-
1.
(b) Unless exempted from
the operation of these rules, no
person shall keep, possess for sale
or sell whether by wholesale or
retail Methyl Alcohol except under
a licence granted by the licensing
Authority in Form M.A.-2 and
Form M.A.-3 for wholesale and
retail respectively.
(c)
No
person
shall
purchase, possess, use or sell
Methyl
Alcohol
for
medical,
scientific, educational, industrial or
professional purpose or for the
purpose of any act without a
licence granted by the Licensing
Authority in Form M.A.-4.

(d)
No
person
shall
purchase, possess, use or sell
Methyl Alcohol in the form of
thinners, paints and varnishes in
quantities exceeding two litres
without a licence in Form M.A.-4.
(e) No person or industry
in the State shall store, possess,
distribute, transfer or sell Methyl
Alcohol under any licence to any
person or industry without mixing a
colouring agent and prudent colour
as
prescribed
by
the
Excise
Commissioner, Uttar Pradesh.
(f) The word and sign
'Poison'
will
be
prominently
written and displayed on all places
and containers where or wherein,
Methyl Alcohol or any of its
products is stored or contained.
17-D. Sources of supply-
(a) No manufacturer of
Methyl alcohol in the State of Uttar
Pradesh shall sell Methyl Alcohol
except under a licence in Form MA
1.
(b) Licensee holding a
licence in Form M.A.-2 shall not
obtain his supply of Methyl Alcohol
except from-
(i) any licensee of the State
holding a licence in Form M.A.-1
for
possession
and
sale
by
wholesale of Methyl Alcohol:
(ii) any part of India
outside the State of Uttar Pradesh
under a permit granted by the
Collector in Form M.A.-5.
(c) A licence holder in
Form M.A.-3 shall obtain his
supply of Methyl Alcohol from a
licence holder in Form M.Α.-2.
(d) A licence holder in
Form M.A.-4 shall obtain his
supply of Methyl Alcohol from a
licence holder in Form M.A.-1,
M.A.-2 or M.A-3 as decided by the
Licensing Authority, in the case of
the M.A-4 licence intending to
3 All. M/S INGREVIA LTD. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
781
purchase and sell Methyl Alcohol
in the form of thinners, pants and
varnishes, he shall be permitted to
do so from a MA-4 licensee who is
authorised to manufacture such
products.
(e)
Licence
holders
in
Form M.A.-2 and M.A.-3 shall not
receive at their licensed premises
any Methyl Alcohol except under a
permit granted by the Collector in
Form M.A. 5 Export of Methyl
Alcohol out of Uttar Pradesh shall
be allowed under a permit granted
by the Collector in Form M.A.-7
only from the premises of a licence
holder having M.A-Tor M.A.-2
licence.
(f) The licence holders in
Form M.A.-1 and M.A.-2 shall not
remove or all-ow any person to
remove any Methyl Alcohol from
his licensed premises without a
transport permit granted by him in
Form M.A.-6.

7. From the above rules, it is clear
that an M.A.-2 license is required to be
taken only for the purpose of possession for
sale and sale of Methyl alcohol as
wholesaler and not for possession of
methyl alcohol for using it for industrial
purposes. As per Section 17-D(d), M.A.-4
license holder shall purchase methyl
alcohol from the license holder who is
having M.A.-1, M.A.-2 and M.A.-3 license.
Therefore, if supplier of methyl alcohol
within or outside the State does not have
M.A.-1, M.A.-2 and M.A.-3 license then
license holder of M.A.-4 cannot purchase
methyl alcohol from that supplier. There is
no provision in Rules 1921 permitting the
M.A.-4 license holder to purchase or
procure methyl alcohol from unlicensed
suppliers, even within the State but if it
wants to purchase the same from the
supplier of outside the State then it is
permissible only after obtaining M.A.-2
license. It is also clear from the above
analysis that M.A.-4 license holder can also
sell methyl alcohol for the purpose
mentioned in Rule 17-B(c) of Rules 1921,
but if it wants to sell or possess the same
for any other purpose not mentioned in
Rule 17-B(c), then it has to obtain M.A.-2
license as wholesaler or M.A.-3 license for
being a retailer and it is a wholesaler with
M.A.-2 license can purchase methyl
alcohol for any purpose, including the
purpose mentioned in Rule 17-B(c) from
outside the State.

8. From the impugned order, it is
clear
that
the
petitioner
had
purchased/procured the methyl alcohol,
even for industrial purposes from the
supplier within and outside the State
though none of them was having M.A.-1,
M.A.-2 or M.A.-3 license. Though for
purchasing methyl alcohol from outside the
State under the permit of the Collector,
M.A.-2 license is necessary, but if the
petitioner wants to purchase Methyl alcohol
from the licensed supplier within the State,
then it is not required to obtain M.A.-2
license and the same is permissible on
M.A.-4 license as per Rule 17-D(d), subject
to the condition that it has to purchase it
from a license holder having M.A.-1, M.A.-
2 and M.A.-3 license but in the present
case, petitioner purchased the methyl
alcohol from unlicensed suppliers.

9. So far as the contention of
learned counsel for the petitioner that Rules
17-B and 17-D of Rules 1921 are beyond
the scope and power of the State
Government is concerned, for that purpose,
it is necessary to consider Sections 2, 3 and
8 of the Poisons Act, 1919. Section 2 of the
782 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Poisons Act, 1919 authorizes the State
Government to frame rules for regulating
the possession for sale and sale of Methyl
alcohol, and Section 3 authorizes the
Central
Government
to
frame
rules
regarding the regulation of the purchase of
poison from outside the country which is
not the case herein and Section 8 of
Poisons Act, 1919 further authorizes the
State to make rules in addition to the rule
making power u/s 2 of the Poisons Act,
1919. Except the area covered u/s 3 of the
Poisons Act, 1919 for carrying out the
purpose and object of the Poisons Act,
1919. Therefore, it is absolutely clear that,
except to regulate the import of methyl
alcohol from outside India, the State
Government is authorized to frame rules to
regulate, sell, purchase and possession of
poison. Sections 2, 3 and 8 of Poisons Act,
1919 are being quoted as under :

2. Power of the State
Government to regulate possession
for sale and sale of any poison.-
(1) The State Government may by
rule regulate within the whole or
any part of the territories under its
administration the possession for
sale
and
the
sale,
whether
wholesale or retail, of any specified
poison.
(2)
In
particular,
and
without prejudice to the generality
of the foregoing power, such rules
may provide for-
(a) the grant of licences to
possess any specified poison for
sale, wholesale or retail, and fixing
of the fee (if any) to be charged for
such licences ;
(b) the classes of persons to
whom alone such licences may be
granted ;
(c) the classes of persons to
whom alone any such poison may
be sold ;
(d) the maximum quantity
of any such poison which may be
sold to any one person ;
(e) the maintenance by
vendors of any such poison of
registers of sales, the particulars to
be entered in such registers, and
the inspection of the same ;
(f) the safe custody of such
poisons and the labelling of the
vessels, packages or coverings in
which any such poison is sold or
possessed for sale ; and
(g)
the
inspection
and
examination of any such poison
when possessed for sale by any
such vendor.
3.
Power
to
prohibit
importation into the States of any
poison except under licence.-The
Central
Government
may,
by
notification in the Official Gazette,
prohibit, except under and in
accordance with the conditions of a
licence,
the
importation
into
[India]
[across
any
customs
frontier defined by the Central
Government]
of
any
specified
poison, and may by rule regulate
the grant of licences.

8. Rules.-(1) In addition to any
other power to make rules hereinbefore
conferred the State Government may make
rules generally to carry out the purposes
and objects of this Act [except section 3]
(2) Every power to make
rules conferred by this Act shall be
subject to the condition of the rules
being
made
after
previous
publication.
(3) All rules made by the
Central Government or by the State
3 All. M/S INGREVIA LTD. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
783
Government under this Act shall be
published in the [Official Gazette]
and on such publication shall have
effect as if enacted in this Act.
[(4) Every rule made by the
Central Government under this Act
shall be laid, as soon as may be
after it is made, before each House
of Parliament, while it is in session,
for a total period of thirty days
which may be comprised in one
session
or
in
two
or
more
successive sessions and if, before
the
expiry
of
the
session
immediately following the session
or
the
successive
sessions
aforesaid, both Houses agree in
making any modification in the rule
or both Houses agree that the rule
should not be made, the rule shall
thereafter have effect only in such
modified form or be of no effect, as
the case may be; so, however, that
any
such
modification
or
annulment
shall
be
without
prejudice to the validity of anything
previously done under that rule.
rule.
(5) Every rule made by the
State Government under this Act
shall be laid, as soon as may be
after it is made, before the State
Legislature.]

10. From the perusal of Rules
17-B and 17-D of Rules 1921, it is clear
that these rules were framed in the
exercise of power u/s 2 and 8 of Poisons
Act, 1919. Therefore, the contention of
learned counsel for the petitioner that
Rules 17-B and 17-D of Rules 1921 are
ultra vires being beyond the scope and
power of the State Government, is
misconceived, hence is rejected.
11. In view of the above analysis,
this Court holds that Rule 17-B(b), 17B(c) and 17-D(d) of Rules 1921, are
within the scope and power of the State
Government u/s 2 and 8 of the Poisons
Act, 1919.
12. So far as the contention of
learned counsel for the petitioner that Rule
17-F of Rules 1921 by which power of
confiscation of Methyl alcohol by the
District Magistrate, which was acquired,
stored, sold, or used by any person or
industry in contravention of the provisions
of Rules 1921, is beyond the scope of
Section 6 of the Poisons Act, 1919, is
concerned, to decide this issue, it is
relevant to mention that initially Poisons
(Regulation of Possession and Sale) Rules
1921 was framed in the exercise of power
u/s
2
of
the
Poisons
Act,
1919.
Subsequently, by way of amendment dated
27.07.1995, Rule 17 to 17-I were added as
special provisions with respect to Methyl
alcohol in exercise of power u/s 2 r/w 8 of
Poisons Act, 1919. Rule 17-F of Rules
1921
provides
specific
power
of
confiscation
to
District
Magistrate
regarding Methyl alcohol, which was
acquired, stored, sold, or used by any
person or industry in contravention of the
provisions of these rules. Thereafter, Rule
17-H of Rules 1921, further provides
prosecution and punishment as per the
provisions of Section 6 of the Poisons Act,
1919, which was related to the violation of
Rules 2 and 3 of the Poisons Act. Rule 17-F
and Rule 17-H of Rules 1921 are being
quoted as under :-

17-F. Confiscation - Any
Authorised Officer, if satisfied that
Methyl Alcohol has been acquired,
stored, sold or used by any person
or industry in contravention of the
provisions of these rules, will be
784 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
competent to take possession of the
same and report the matter to the
District Magistrate. The District
Magistrate will be competent to
confiscate or get destroyed the
same same in the presence of the
Authorised Officer.
17-H.
Prosecution
and
punishment - Any person found in
possession of Methyl Alcohol in
contravention of these rules shall
be liable for prosecution and
punishment under the provisions of
the Poisons Act, 1919 (Act No.XII
of 1919), as amended from time to
time.

13. From the perusal of the above
quoted rules, it is clear that these rules
provide special provisions with respect to
Methyl alcohol, though these rules do not
apply to other poison which is not methyl
alcohol. For that reason, special power of
confiscation has been provided under Rule
17-F, but for other punishment, provision of
Section 6 of the Poisons Act has been
adopted by Rule 17-H of the amended
Rules 1921. This Court also holds that
power of confiscation is not contrary to
Section 6 of the Poisons Act and is valid.
Therefore,
the
contention of
learned
counsel for the petitioner that Rule 17-F is
beyond the provisions of Section 6 of
Poisons Act, 1919, so far as confiscation is
concerned, is absolutely misconceived and,
hence, rejected.

14. In the present case, it is not in
dispute that the petitioner has purchased the
methyl alcohol from a supplier based
within the State who does not have an
M.A.-1, M.A.-2 or M.A.-3 license and also
procured methyl alcohol from a supplier
based outside the State without having
M.A.-2 license. Therefore, prima facie,
there is a violation of provisions of Rules
1921 and for reason there appears to be no
illegality in show cause notice/order.
However, the impugned order is simply a
show cause notice by which the license of
the petitioner has been suspended. The
petitioner can file an objection against that
show cause notice or appeal under Rule 17I.

15. Given the above, the present
writ petition is disposed of with liberty to
the petitioner to file an objection or appeal
against the show cause notice within 15
days. In case such objection or appeal is
filed by the petitioner against the impugned
show cause notice, the same shall be
considered and decided by the District
Magistrate within the next one month
without
being
influenced
by
the
observation made hereinabove.
----------
(2025) 3 ILRA 784
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 18.03.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.

Writ C No. 16710 of 2015

C/M Janta Prasar Samiti & Anr.
 ...Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioners:
Yogish Kumar Saxena

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Vineet Kumar Singh

Civil Law - U.P. Societies Registration Act,
1860 - Sections 4 & 25(1) - Petitioner
after
death
of
his
father
claimed
appointment to post of Manager on basis
of addition in Clause 8(ि) in bye-laws of