DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW
SESSION: 2020-2021

FINAL DRAFT
SUBJECT: Law and Agriculture
“Constitutional Validity of the New Farm Laws”

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: SUBMITTED BY:

MR. BHANU PRATAP SINGH HARSH GAUTAM
Assistant Professor (Law) Enrolment No: 170101061
Department of Legal Studies BA.LLB(Hons.)- VII Sem.
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ......................................................................................................... 3

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 4

2. THE CONTROVERSIAL ACTS ....................................................................................... 6

3. FEDERALISM AND POWER SHARING ........................................................................ 7

3.1 State’s Exclusive Jurisdiction over Agriculture.............................................................. 8

3.2 Union’s Competency to Legislate upon the State List.................................................... 8

3.3 Critical Analysis of Union Power ................................................................................... 9

4. JUDICIARY STANDS ON FEDERALISM AND AGRICULTURE ............................. 10

5. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 12

6. BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................ 14
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I owe my gratitude of thanks to all those people who helped and

supported me during the analysis of the case.
Words are inadequate in offering my deep sense of gratitude to my
Professor for her precious guidance.

With her enthusiasm, her inspiration and his significant efforts to

explain things clearly and simply, she helped throughout my analysis
of work with lots of encouragement, sound advice, and good
innovation.

I would also like to thank the librarians of Dr. Madhu Limaye Library
who extended their assistance to me by helping me out consult the
relevant books.

I know that despite my best efforts some discrepancies might have

crept in which I believe my humble Professor would forgive.

Thanking You All.

Harsh Gautam
 1. INTRODUCTION

The scheme of the Indian Constitution provides a Federal Structure of Indian Polity in which
the Sovereign power of the Country has been divided between Union and the State, including
the legislative powers. Federalism is one of the pillars of the basic structure of the Constitution
of India. (SR Bommai Case1) The basic principle of the Indian Federation is that the legislative
and executive authority is divided and demarcated between the centre and the states not by any
law to be made by the centre, but by the constitution itself. Division of powers is the soul of
Indian Federalism, which is known as one of the basic structure of Indian Constitution and any
Law being enacted either by the Centre or State in contravention or violation of the basic
structure of the Constitution is Ab-initio null & void. Validity of any law, whether passed by
Union or State, is judged with reference to their respective jurisdictions as defined in the
Constitution under the Chapter 11 & 7th Schedule. The states are in no way dependent upon
the centre for their legislature or executive authority. The states and the centre are coequal in
this matter. (B.R. Ambedkar ,1954)2

Recently, the Union Parliament has passed the contentious and controversial agriculture laws
which is commonly known as Farm Acts,2020 which gave rise to a big controversy among all
the stake holders particularly the Union, the States and the Farmers because of the various
socio-economic, political, legal and constitutional issues which involved with these
controversial Acts. The Controversial Farm Acts 2020 passed by the Union Parliament is
regarding agriculture which falls within the ambit and exclusive jurisdiction of State
Legislature as Article 246 & 7th Schedule clearly provides these under State List.3 Since
agriculture and its related matter has been explicitly falls under the State List due to which all
major legislation on agriculture till date has been enacted by the respective State legislatures.
The Supreme Court of India in many of its rulings since 1954, has recognised the legislative
powers of States in agricultural matter. Most important was the ruling of the five-judge
Constitutional Bench in Tika Ram Case4 and I.T.C. Limited Case5.

Since the enactment of controversial Farms Acts by Union Parliament is an unwarranted

encroachment into the legislative sphere of State list and consequently an unethical move

1
AIR 1994 SC 1918.
2
Constitutional Assembly Debates, Vol,5, P.37,1949.
3
P M Bakshi, The Constitution of India, Universal Law Publishing,14th Ed.
4
Ch. Tika Ramji & Others, etc. vs The State of Uttar Pradesh & Others (1956 AIR 676, 1956 SCR).
5
I.T.C Ltd. v. Agricultural Produce Market Committee & Ors [2002].
towards the erosion of the basic structure of our Constitution i.e., Federalism. Hence, it argues
that three Farms Acts passed by the Union Parliament is unethical and unconstitutional.

The unwarranted Legislative encroachment by the Union into the sphere of the State is a biggest
challenge and threat for the sustainability of the Indian Federal system and Basic Structure too.
In the Union of India v H.S.Dhillon (1972)6 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that
constitutionality of parliamentary laws can be challenged only on two grounds viz, that the
subject is in the State List, or that it violates fundamental rights. In the present case Union’s
Farm Acts, various question of law which strikes at the constitutional validity of the Farm Acts
could be invoked once the issue come before the Hon’ble Court such as follows: -

1. Is invoking parliamentary powers on agriculture consistent with the scheme of

federalism and spirit of the Constitution?
2. Does Parliament have the power to enact laws on agricultural markets and lands?
Should the Constitution have been amended before enacting these agriculture laws?
3. Is Union Farm Act not weakening the constitutional fabric of Indian Federalism?

The above statement of problem or questions of law has evoked various questions in the
researcher’s mind pertaining to the legal validity of the Acts, there by considering it necessary
this research paper is undertaken to critically analysis into the Constitutional validity of the
controversial and contentious Union Farm Acts 2020 in the light of the Principle of Federalism
& Basic Structure. The scope and limitation of the present study is confine on the study of the
constitutional validity of the Acts vis-a-vis Federal Principles as it has thrown out constitutional
challenges to the very existence of the Indian Federal Structure and most importantly the
division of power.

The present study is justified because there is no academic literature available on the critical
evaluation of the Constitutional validity of the Controversial Farm Act 2020. The researcher
would attempt to fill-up the gap by critically analysing various legal aspects of the Farm Acts
which ultimately goes to the roots of its Constitutional validity vis-a-vis Federalism. The
limitations of the Study is that it has neither critically evaluates each Acts separately nor the
socio-economic implications of the Controversial Acts, rather it focused only on the
Constitutional validity of the Acts in the light of Federalism.

6
Union of India vs H. S. Dhillon, 1972 AIR 1061.
 2. THE CONTROVERSIAL ACTS

The three controversial Acts which aim to change the way agricultural produce is marketed,
sold and stored across the country were initially issued in the form of ordinances in June. They
were then passed by voice-vote in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha during the delayed
monsoon session this month, despite vociferous Opposition protest. (Priscilla Jebaraj,2020)7

The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 20208,
provides a facilitation platform to farmers to sell their agriculture produce outside the notified
Agricultural Produce Market Committee(commonly known as State Mandis) without paying
any agriculture tax(which is a State subject) thereby promoting their freedom of choice relating
to sale and purchase of agriculture produce.

The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm
Services Act, 20209, provides a scheme of contract farming agreement wherein farmer enter
into agreement with the big corporate and agri-business firms regarding the future sale of their
agriculture produce not at a minimum selling price (MSP), but at a mutually agreed price
between the parties.

The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 202010, was enacted at the time of Independence
to meet the food crisis faced by India just after Independence. The aim of the Act was to meet
the extraordinary and emergency situation with regard to essential commodities. At the time of
enactment, it was a temporary enactment, but with passage of time government kept it retaining
by introducing time to time amendments.

7
https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/farmers-vow-to-come-to-delhi-for-protest-despite-police-
refusing-per-mission/article33076199.ece
8
THE FARMERS’ PRODUCE TRADE AND COMMERCE (PROMOTION AND FACILITATION) ACT,
2020 NO. 21 OF 2020
9
THE FARMERS (EMPOWERMENT AND PROTECTION) AGREEMENT ON PRICE ASSURANCE AND
FARM SERVICES ACT, 2020 NO. 20 OF 2020
10
THE ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES (AMENDMENT) ORDINANCE, 2020 NO. 8 OF 2020 An Act further
to amend the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. BE it enacted by Parliament in the Seventy-first Year of the
Republic of India as follows:— 1. (1) This Act may be called the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act,
2020. (2) It shall be deemed to have come into force on the 5th day of June, 2020. 2. In section 3 of the Essential
Commodities Act, 1955, after sub-section (1), the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely:— ‘(1A)
Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),— (a) the supply of such foodstuffs, including cereals,
pulses, potato, onions, edible oilseeds and oils, as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official
Gazette, specify, may be regulated only under extraordinary circumstances which may include war, famine,
extraordinary price rise and natural calamity of grave nature
 3. FEDERALISM AND POWER SHARING

The Indian Constitution introduces a federal system as the basic structure of government of the
country11 in which the power and authority of the government has been shares between the
Centre and the States governments. Both the union and the states derive their authority from
the constitution which divided all powers - legislative, executive and financial as between
them.12 According to DD Basu, the states are not delegates of the union, but they are
autonomous within their own spheres as allotted by the constitution. “The union and the states
are also equally subjected to the limitations imposed by the constitution”.13 The scheme of
distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States it is quite evident that the
framers have given more powers to the Union Parliament as against the States. Yet, the states
are not made subordinate units of the centre. In normal times, they have been granted enough
autonomy to act as independent centre of authority.

(Poonam Sonwani, 2016)14 Indian federalism involves division of power between the Centre
and States. In India there are three lists-Union, State and Concurrent- the Centre shall have an
overriding authority in matters of items contained in concurrent list. The residuary powers are
given to the Centre. The Union list includes defence, railways, airways, foreign policy, post
and telegraph, currency, war and peace etc. According to the scheme of Indian Federalism, the
Union Parliament does not have power to make laws on any of the matter listed in State list
under Seventh Schedule.

However, there are certain exceptions to this general law. There are certain cases wherein the
Parliament can legislate for the States which have been enumerated under Article 249 to 253
of the Constitution of India. (i)If Rajya Sabha passes a resolution (Article 249) (ii)If
Proclamation of Emergency is in force (Article 250) and (iii) If two or more States pass a
resolution (Article 252) and for enforcing international agreements (Article 253).

11
PART XI RELATIONS BETWEEN THE UNION AND THE STATES CHAPTER I.—LEGISLATIVE
RELATIONS Distribution of Legislative Powers 1. Extent of laws made by Parliament and by the Legislatures
of States. - (1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may make laws for the whole or any
part of the territory of India, and the Legislature of a State may make laws for the whole or any part of the State.
(2) No law made by Parliament shall be deemed to be invalid on the ground that it would have extraterritorial
operation.
12
Art. 246, Constitution of India.
13
Basu, D.D., Introduction to the Constitution of India, Wadhwa Law Publishers, New Delhi, 2005, P.317.
14
Distribution of Legislative Powers under the Indian Constitution.
 3.1 State’s Exclusive Jurisdiction over Agriculture.

According to the 7th Schedule of the Constitution of India, the State has been given an
exclusive jurisdiction to legislate on the subject of agriculture and its ancillary items.15 Every
power—Executive, Legislative and Judicial, whether it belongs to the federation or the
component is controlled by the distribution of power as per the scheme of Constitution.16 In
the Constitution, ‘Agriculture’ has been placed as Entry 14 in the State List along with several
ancillary matters, while some agriculture-related items have been included in the Union List
and the Concurrent List.

Agriculture is a multi-faceted activity and therefore, the framers of the Constitution distributed
the various subjects of legislation in respect of agriculture and related matters between the
Union and the States on a threefold pattern. Agriculture and most mattes ancillary to or directly
connected with it, were placed within the exclusive legislative and executive competence of
the States. Accordingly, agricultural education and research, protection against pests and
prevention of plant diseases; preservation, protection and improvement of stock and prevention
of animal diseases; veterinary training and practice; pounds and the prevention of cattle
trespass; land, rights in or over land, land tenures including the relation of landlord and tenant;
collection of rents; transfer and alienation of agricultural land; land improvement agricultural
loans; colonization; fisheries; markets and fairs; money -lending and money-lenders; relief of
agricultural indebtedness; cooperative societies; land revenue; maintenance of land records
taxes on agricultural income; duties in respect of succession to agricultural land and estate duty
in respect of agricultural land, have all been made exclusive responsibility of the States (vide
Entries 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 28, 30, 32, 45, 46, 47 and 48 of the State List).

3.2 Union’s Competency to Legislate upon the State List

The Union list under seventh schedule does not provide any power upon the Union Parliament
to legislate upon agriculture items.17 The Principle of Federalism of Indian Constitution18
clearly divided and demarcated the Sovereign power including the legislative powers between
the Union and States even though in special circumstances and for national interest the

15
Entry List II—State List.
16
PM Bakshi, The Constitution of India,14th ed.
17
Entry List I—Union List No. 28.
18
246. Subject-matter of laws made by Parliament and by the Legislatures of States.—(1) Notwithstanding
anything in clauses (2) and (3), Parliament has exclusive power to make laws with respect to any of the matters
enumerated in List I in the Seventh Schedule (in this Constitution referred to as the “Union List”).
predominance of Parliament in the sphere of law making was established by several Articles
of the Constitution of India.

Accordingly, Article 24919 provided that if Rajya Sabha declared by a resolution not less than
two thirds of the members present and voting that it was necessary or expedient, in the national
interest that Parliament should make laws with respect to any matter in the State List specified,
it becomes lawful for Parliament to make laws with respect with that matter during the period
the resolution remained in force. Such a resolution remained in force for such period, not
exceeding one year, as might be specified therein. The Rajya Sabha, however, could extend the
period of such a resolution for a further period of one year from the date on which it would
otherwise have ceased to operate. A law made by Parliament, which Parliament would not but
for the passing of such resolution by Rajya Sabha have been competent to make, ceased to have
any effect on the expiration of a period of six months after the resolution had ceased to be in
force, except in respect of things done or omitted to be done before the expiration of that period.

3.3 Critical Analysis of Union Power

A critical & analytical study would reveal some important points. Firstly, the resolution
required is of the Council of States alone and not of Parliament which means that a proposal
by one of the Houses enables the Parliament to encroach upon the jurisdiction of the state
legislatures. Secondly, the resolution must be passed by a Majority of two-thirds not of the total
number of members of the Council but only of the members present and voting. Thirdly, the
law remains in force so long as the resolution remains in force, under clause (2) for a period
not exceeding one year. Fourthly, if the Council of States passes a resolution approving the
continuance of the previous resolution, it continues to be in force for one year from the date of
the approval by such resolution. But be it noted that such resolution for approval must also be
passed by the same majority of two-thirds. In the next place clause (3) of Article 249 expressly
lays, down the effects of expiry of the temporary laws made by Parliament under this Article.
Such laws, will cease to have effect on the expiration of six months after the resolution ceases
to operate So, after that date, such Union laws shall have no effect at all, but actions taken as
regards rights and liabilities during the operation of such laws shall remain even after the
expiration.

19
249. Power of Parliament to legislate with respect to a matter in the State List in the national interest.
The State Reorganisation Commission observed “The Special provisions, however, are
primarily remedial in character and are meant to prevent a break down in the states and to
safeguard the powers of the Union within its own sphere.”

Articles 249 to 253 along with the emergency provisions which constitute an extraordinary
chapter in the arena of Indian federalism. These provisions are remedial in character and are
usually applied in case of any threat to the very foundation of the federation.

Unfortunately, the Centre has misuse Article 249 to bring an extra-ordinary law (such as Farm
Acts) in an ordinary circumstance meaning thereby the law which is meant to protect the Indian
Federal Structure has been used to cause threat to the very foundation of the Federalism by
unconstitutionally legislating in the exclusive jurisdiction of the State List.

Furthermore, the Article 249 nature is of temporary nature meaning thereby it is use in case of
emergency circumstances or exigencies which is evident from the fact that the laws made under
this article remain enforceable only for a limited period of time.

Thus, Centre has no power to legislate in State list matter except in case of emergency or in
national interest when it is responsible for ensuring availability of food grains and other
agricultural products and also provisions of critical inputs like fertilizers, water, finance, etc.
for their production. This role involves, among others, operation of Entry 33 of List III and
Entry 52 of List I by virtue of Entry 33 of List III, Parliament has enacted the Essential
Commodities Act, 1955. The Act gives powers to the Union Government to control production,
supply, distribution, trade and commerce in essential commodities. The definition 'essential
commodity' in Section 2 of the Act includes, inter alia, Sugarcane, Foodstuffs, Edible Oil-Seeds
and Oil, Raw Cotton, and Raw Jute. Agro-Industries, e.g., those concerning manufacture of
Sugar, Fertilizers, Insecticides, Fungicides, Weedicides, Vegetable Oils, Agricultural
Machinery and Implements, Tractors or Processed Foodstuffs, etc., are covered by the First
Schedule to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 enacted under Entry 52,
List I.

4. JUDICIARY STANDS ON FEDERALISM AND AGRICULTURE

Since Independence Indian Judiciary has always maintained that Federalism is part and parcel
of the Basic Structure thereby indirectly voiced for the division of powers in accordance with
the Constitution of India. It is well accepted that the provisions of Constitution must be
interpreted in the light of the basic feature of the Constitution. Federalism has been accepted
as one of the basic features of our Constitution. In S. R. Bommai v. Union of India, (AIR 1994)20
it was held as that: “Federalism envisaged in the Constitution of India is a basic feature in
which the Union of India is permanent within the territorial limits set in Article I of the
Constitution and is indestructible. The State is the creature of the Constitution and the law made
by Arts. 2 to 4 with no territorial integrity, but a permanent entity with its boundaries alterable
by a law made by the Parliament. Neither the relative importance of the legislative entries in
Schedule VII, List I and II of the Constitution, nor the fiscal control by the Union per se are
decisive to conclude that the Constitution is unitary. The respective legislative powers are
traceable to Arts. 245 to 254 of the Constitution. The status quo the Constitution is federal in
structure and independent in the exercise of legislative and executive power. Likewise, the
Supreme Court in several cases upheld that the State has an exclusive jurisdiction in agriculture
matters including Intra-State agriculture markets.

In Ch. Tika Ramji & Others, Etc vs The State of Uttar Pradesh & Others (1956)21 the
expression "industries" is defined to mean the process of manufacture or production and does
not include the raw materials used in the industry or the distribution of the products of the
industry. It was contended that the word "industry" was a word of wide import and should be
construed as including not only the process of manufacture or production but also activities
antecedent thereto such as acquisition of raw materials and subsequent thereto such as disposal
of the finished products of that industry. But that contention was not accepted....".

In I.T.C. Limited vs. Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) and Others, (2002)22.
The Tobacco Board Act, 1975 had brought the development of the tobacco industry under the
Centre, however, Bihar’s APMC Act continued to list tobacco as an agricultural produce. In
this case, the question was if the APMC in Monghyr could charge a levy on ITC for the
purchase of unprocessed tobacco leaves from growers. An earlier judgment had held that the
State APMC Act will be repugnant to the Central Act, and hence was ultra vires. But the
Constitution Bench upheld the validity of the State APMC Act, and ruled that market fees can
be charged from ITC under the State APMC Act. And further held that State laws become
repugnant only if the State and Centre enact laws on the same subject matter under an Entry in
List III; and in those cases, outside List III, one has to first examine if the subject matter was

20
AIR 1994 SC 1918.
21
Ch. Tika Ramji & Others, etc. vs The State of Uttar Pradesh & Others, 1956 AIR 676.
22
I.T.C Ltd. v. Agricultural Produce Market Committee & Ors. [2002]
an exclusive entry under List I or List II, and only after determining this can one decide on the
dominant legislation that would prevail.

In the case of the Farm Acts of 2020, the applicable points are (a) and (c). With regard to (a),
States could continue to charge mandi taxes from private markets anywhere in the notified area
regardless of the Central Act. With regard to (c), the State legislation should prevail as
agriculture is an exclusive subject matter — Entry 14 – in List II. (Ramkumar,2020)23

5. CONCLUSION

The recent trend, by which the Centre Government progressively encroaching in the sphere of
State jurisdiction with the force of its majority in both the houses of Parliament is very
detrimental and suicidal to the basic structure of India and it must be reversed at any cost.
Historically speaking, in the past Indira Gandhi had used the Emergency (1975-1977) to make
some harmful amendments that curtailed the power of the states in education and forestry. The
present government is following the similar modus operandi by using the health emergency
caused by COVID-19 to push this controversial law through ordinances to cause devastating
damage to the powers of the states in agriculture sector. Hon’ble Hidaytullah, J.24, said; “It is
equally well settled that the power to legislate on a topic of legislation carries with it the power
to legislate on an ancillary matter which can be said to be reasonably included in the power
given". By virtue of agriculture absolutely falling within State list without any exception gives
the State Legislature full authority even to make laws on ancillary things such as trade and
commerce in agriculture. According to K.K. Basu, “passage of the Bill would transform the
Indian Constitution into a “unitary Constitution” instead of a “federal Constitution” and reduce
“all the States’ powers into municipal powers”. A “reactionary legislation” was being
introduced as “an innocuous piece of legislation”.

Recently, the Supreme Court emphasised in the NCT of (Delhi) case on the concept of
collaborative federalism, where both the Centre and the state governments should express their
readiness to achieve the common objective and they have to move on the path of harmonious
coexistence and interdependence irrespective of their differences. In a country like India the
importance of federalism is vital because different people from different background and
culture live together. Neither it would be possible for a Centre government to make laws for

23
R. Ramakumar, Professor, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai https://indiansapidnews.com/india/farm-
actsunwanted-constitutional-adventurism/
24
State of Rajasthan vs. G. Chawla (AIR 1959 SC 544).
the whole country nor is it desirable in the interest of the people with varied cultures, language
and diverse backgrounds.

Based on the foregoing discussion, it can be concluded that the spirit of Indian constitution
demands that the centre and states are independent to make laws in their respective field
assigned by the constitution. Though the centre has supremacy in certain situations that is also
mentioned in the Constitution itself, but that does not give them legitimacy to encroach upon
the State list and If Centre government keeps on transgressing the limits, then it will ultimately
destroy the fabric of the basic structure of the Constitution i.e., Federalism. Faizan Mustafa,
(2020)25 in his article said that Federalism, like constitutionalism and separation of powers, is
not mentioned in the Constitution. But it is the very essence of our constitutional scheme. The
fact that under the scheme of our Constitution, greater power is conferred upon the Centre vis-
a-vis the States does not mean that States are mere appendages of the Centre. With the sphere
allotted to them, States are supreme. The Centre cannot tamper with their powers. (S.R Bommai
Case,1994)26 Hence the Independent Judiciary must play its judicial activism role interfere in
such a situation suo-motu and delimit adversarial federalism of the Centre and shows them the
path of cooperative federalism in order to save the basic structure of Indian Constitution.
Though the Agriculture remains within the State list, the State is handicapped from exercising
any control over the agriculture and curtailed the power of the State to impose any tax or cess
by the APMC resulting in a huge income loss for the State Governments.

In the light of above premises, the author submits that the three Farm Acts on agriculture
enacted by the Union Parliament goes against the spirit of federalism, hence legally speaking,
their constitutional validity shall be highly questionable & debatable before the Court of law
once the matter comes before it.

25
https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/an-expert-explains-farm-acts-and-federalism-6622769/
26
S.R Bommai v. UOI (AIR 1994 SC 1918).
 6. BIBLIOGRAPHY

i. Farmer Produce Trade and Commerce promotion and Facilitation Act, 2020.
https://www.prsindia.org/billtrack/farmers-produce-trade-and-commerce-promotion-
and-facilitation-act-2020
ii. Farmers empowerment and protection agreement price assurance and farm services
Act-2020 https://www.prsindia.org/billtrack/farmers-empowerment-and-protection-
agreement-price- assurance-and-farm-services-act-2020
iii. The-Essential-Commodities-(Amendment)-Act-2020,
https://www.prsindia.org/billtrack/The-Essential-Commodities-(Amendment)-Act-
2020,
iv. The Constitution Assembly Debates,Vol I to Vol XI.
v. The Constitution of India
vi. Sarkaria Commission Report,1988.
vii. Basu, D.D., Comparative Federalism, (1987).
viii. Gani, H.A., Centre-State Relations & Sarkaria Commission, Issues and Challenges,
Deep and Deep Publishers, New Delhi (1990).