Judgment Agarwala, J. 1. The petitioner has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500 under Section 7, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946, for contravention of an Order issued under Sec.3 of the Act. The facts are that the petitioner was travelling between the stations of Laheriasarai and Darbhanga on the Oudh Tirhut Railway, and had with him in his compartment, two gunny bags containing cloth weighing 2 maunds and 20 seers. 2. In exercise of its powers under Sec.3 of the Act referred to above the Central Government has issued the Cotton Textitles (Control of Movement) Order, 1948. Sec.3 of this Order provides: "No person shall transport or cause to be transported by rail, road, air, sea or inland navigation any cloth, yarn or apparel except under and in accordance with, (1) a general permit notified in the Gazette of India by the Textile Commissioner, or (2) a special transport permit issued by the Textile Commissioner." It is not claimed in the present case that the petitioner was protected by a special transport permit issued by the Textile Commissioner. On 10-9-1948, the Textile Commissioner prescribed a form of general permit referred to in Rule (3) of the Order of 1948, and this was published in the Gazette of India dated 11-9-1948. This permit divides India into a number of zones. Rule 2 of the permit is as follows : "Transport as personal luggage : Any person may transport or cause to be transported by rail, road, air, sea or inland navigation, cloth or apparel as part of his luggage if such cloth and apparel do not together exceed 10 pounds in weight." It will be observed that there is no limitation with regard to interzonal transport. The limitation is merely with regard to the weight that may be transported. Rule 3 is as follows : "Transport within a zone : Any person may transport or cause to be transported by road, air, sea or inland navigation, or by goods train or as a railway parcel by a passenger train, any cloth, yarn or apparel from any place in any zone described in para. 1 to any other place in the same zone." It is for a contravention of the former clause of the general permit that the petitioner has been convicted. 1 to any other place in the same zone." It is for a contravention of the former clause of the general permit that the petitioner has been convicted. It is not disputed now that in the compartment in which he was travelling he had 2 maunds and 20 seers of textiles in two gunny bags, and that he was travelling with these goods between Laheriasarai and Darbhanga, that is to say, he was travelling within one of the zones into which the country had been divided by the general permit, with the quantity of textiles referred to. It is contended, however, that the accused was entitled by Clause 3 to travel within any zone with an unlimited quantity of textiles and that the term "Railway parcel" in this clause includes the personal luggage of a passenger. The term "railway parcel" has not been defined either by the Central Supplies Act or by the Order passed under it, or by the general permit or by the Railways Act. But a comparison of the language of Clauses (2) and (3) of the general permit makes it quite clear that the Textile Commissioner intended to draw a distinction between a passengers personal luggage and a railway parcel. It is also clear that he intended to make a distinction between goods carried by a goods train and goods carried by a passenger train. Bearing in mind that as personal luggage a passenger is permitted to carry either inside a zone or betwern zones textiles up to the weight of 10 pounds as personal luggage, it is not difficult to reach the conclusion that Clause (3) of the permit is not intended to apply to personal luggage at all, and, therefore, that railway parcel does not include personal luggage as used in this general permit. Normally goods are carried by a goods train. But a certain amount of merchandise is carried by passenger trains, if the appropriate rates of conveyance-by such a train are paid. A passenger train, therefore, may carry both goods and the luggage of passengers travelling by the train. Clause (3) is not intended to exclude from its operation the luggage of passengers travelling by a train. But a certain amount of merchandise is carried by passenger trains, if the appropriate rates of conveyance-by such a train are paid. A passenger train, therefore, may carry both goods and the luggage of passengers travelling by the train. Clause (3) is not intended to exclude from its operation the luggage of passengers travelling by a train. Clause (3) is not intended to permit a passenger travelling by a train to carry an unlimited quantity of textiles, but to permit an unlimited quantity of textiles, by a passenger train only if it does not constitute the personal luggage of a passenger travelling by the train. If it constitutes the personal luggage of a passenger, it is governed by Clause (2) and the amount is limited to 10 pounds in weight. There is no merit in this application which is dismissed.