M. Katju, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed for a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with the sale of Nagatand State Lotteries. A large number of such writ petitions have been filed in this Court, hence this judgment will govern all such petitions whether they are listed before us or not.
2. The petitioner claims to be the main stockist of Nagaland State Lotteries whose names are mentioned in para 2 of the petition. It is alleged in para 4 of the writ petition that the Government of Nagaland has appointed M/s. M. S. Associates as their sole distributor of Nagaland State Lotteries, and M/s. M. S. Associates has appointed the petitioner as main stockists to market and sell the aforesaid lotteries in district Shahjahanpur and other parts of U. P. It Is stated in para 6 that the State of U. P. enacted the U. P. Unauthorised Lotteries (Prevention) Act, 1995 with a view to prohibit sale of unauthorised lotteries within the State of Uttar Pradesh. The lotteries conducted by the U. P. Government were excluded from the scope of the said Act. It is alleged in para 7 of the petition that under the garb of Ordinance No. 22 of 1995, which later on became the aforesaid Act of 1995, the district authorities started harassing the stockist and vendors who were selling the lotteries of Nagaland State, and hence M/s. M. S. Associates was compelled to file Writ Petition No. 1764 (M.B.) of 1995 in this Court. In that petition, an interim order was passed on 28.6.1995 restraining the respondents from the sale of Nagaland State Lotteries. True copy of the interim order is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. It is alleged in para 9 of the petition that subsequently some statement was made by the learned Advocate General that the State organised lotteries are exempted from the aforesaid Ordinance and Act and hence the writ petition was disposed of by the order dated 1.12.1995. In para 10 of the writ petition, it is alleged that thereafter the petitioner was carrying on the business of sale of Nagaland State Lotteries.
3. In para 12 of the writ petition, it is stated that the State of U. P. by letter dated 19.4.1997 informed the State of Nagaland that Nagaland State Lotteries mentioned therein complied with the conditions laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. M/s. Suman Enterprises. 1994 (4) SCC 21 7. True copy of the said letter is Annexure-2 to the writ petition. In para 13, it is stated that the authorities were causing harassment to the petitioner by not permitting sale of Nagaland State Lotteries, and on enquiry, the petitioner came to know that some oral orders have been passed by the District Magistrate that Nagaland State Lotteries shall not be sold. In para 15, it is stated that the State of U. P. has not issued any order banning the sale of Nagaland State Lotteries which was given permission earlier but was not mentioned in the list annexed with letter dated 19.4.1997. In para 17, it is stated that the respondent Nos.l and 2 have not issued any orders to the district administration prohibiting sale of the lotteries mentioned in letter-dated 19.4.1997, but the district administration in colourable exercise of power was misinterpreting the law laid down by the Supreme Court and had issued orders to the police authorities to prevent the petitioner from selling the State Lotteries.
4. In paragraph 19 of the writ petition, it is stated that the State of Nagaland, to avoid confusion, sent a request to the respondent No. 2 to take appropriate decision with regard to the State Lotteries. True copy of this letter dated 16.6.1996 is Annexure-3 to the petition. In para 20, it is alleged that since the lotteries in question are State organised lotteries, they cannot be banned in view of the 1995 Act and the statement given by the learned Advocate General.
5. The petitioner has annexed a copy of the judgment of the Lucknow Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 2200 of 1997. M/s. Ganga Agencies Stockists v. State of U. P., decided on 12.11.1997 and has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the State of Haryana v. M/s. Suman Enterprises. 1994 (4) SCC 21 7.
6. Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel has invited our attention to the Lotteries (Regulation) Ordinance, 1997 being Ordinance 20 of 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the 1997 Ordinance) promulgated by the President of India. Section 5 of the said Ordinance states that the State Government may within the State prohibit the sale of tickets of lotteries conducted and promoted by any other State. Sri Pradeep Kumar also invited our attention to the U. P. Prohibition of Sale of Tickets of Lotteries of Other States Order. 1997 (hereinafter referred to 1997 Order) which has been published in the U. P. Gazette extraordnary dated 29.10.1997. This 1997 Order has been issued in exercise of the powers given to the State Government under Section 5 of the 1997 Ordinance. He has also shown us a copy of the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Gtyarat Lotteris Sellers Association v. State of Gujarat, being Special Leave Application No. 7903 of 1997, decided on 24.10.1997. Sri Pradeep Kumar has submitted that now there is total ban of State Lotteries in Uttar Pradesh.
7. Since the matter is of some Importance we have examined the question Involved at some length. So far as the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. M/s. Suman Enterprises (supra) is concerned, we have gone through this decison in great detail. That decision pertained to the ban of lotteries by State Governments or by State legislation. For instance, the State of Tamil Nadu had by an executive order banned lotteries organised by the State Governments and also certain private lotteries. In Bihar, the ban was by a Bihar Ordinance of 1993. Similarly, in other States, the lotteries organised by the State Governments had been banned either by an executive order of the State Government concerned or by a State legislation. There was no ban by a Central legislation in any of the cases which were decided in State of Haryana v. M/s. Suman Enterprises (supra). Hence, the aforesaid decision is distinguishable as it does not deal with a Central legislation banning State organised lotteries.
8. The decision of the Supreme Court in the State of Haryana v. M/s. Suman Enterprises (supra) has laid down that the State Government or State legislation cannot ban lotteries organised by any State, but it can only ban lotteries authorised by the State. The ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court appears to be that lotteries organised by the Government of India or the State Governments are dealt with in Entry 40 of List f of Schedule Vll to the Constitution and hence only Parliament can legislate on lotteries organised by the State Government. In State of Haryana v. M/s. Suman Enterprises (supra), all the ban orders were either by the State Government or by State legislation and there was no ban by a Central legislation. Hence the decision of the State of Haryana v. M/s. Suman Enterprises (supra) is totally distinguishable, rather it supports the view that there can be a ban on State lotteries by a Central legislation.
9. The U. P. Unauthorised Lotteries (Prevention) Act. 1995 was a State legislation and hence it could obviously not ban lotteries organised by a State Government in view of List 1, Entry 40 of Schedule VII to the Constitution. Only Parliament could legislate on lotteries organized by the State Government and hence a State Legislature would not have legislative competence to do so. However, now there is a Central legislation in the form of the 1997 Ordinance promulgated by the President of India which entitles the State Governments to ban the State organized lotteries, and in fact the State Government of U. P. has by Gazette Notification dated 29.10.1997 banned such lotteries. Obviously no State organized lotteries can now be sold in violation of the State ban which is under Centra) legislation. As regards the decison of this Court in M/s Ganga Agencies Stockist v. State of U. P. in Writ Petition No. 2200 of 1997, decided on 12.11.1997, in our opinion, this decision is also distinguishable inasmuch as it has relied on a letter allegedly Issued by the Principal Secretary (Finance) dated 29.10.1997, in para 3 of which it has been stated that in view of the interim order of the Gauhati High Court, the ban will not apply to the Nagaland State Lotteries.
10. In our opinion, once the Gazette Notification dated 29.10.1997 has been issued there is no scope of relying on interim orders of the Gauhati High Court or some letter of the Principal Secretary (Finance) which has evidently been passed on some misconception. The Gazette Notification dated 29.10.1997 has been issued by the Governor of Uttar Pradesh in exercise of powers conferred by Section 5 of the 1997 Ordinance and one fails to understand how the Principal Secretary (Finance) can override the said order of the Governor dated 29.10.1997 which amounts to delegated legislation. A mere letter of the Principal Secretary (Finance) can surely not override such delegated legislation.
11. In view of the above, there is no merit in this petition. This petition and all other petitions relating to Nagaland State Lotteries and lotteries of other States whether listed before us or not shall stand dismissed. In view of the ban order, no Nagaland State Lotteries or lotteries of other State Governments shall be sold in Uttar Pradesh. Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.