VENKATESWARA TRADERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the writ petitioner is whole-sale dealer having valid licence and in the morning on 2-3-81 his shop was raided and 215 bags of rice 54 bags of jaggery, 6 bags of Marda and 5 bags of Atta were seized from the shop. In the seizure mahazar, it is mentioned that the rate board was in cement attached to the wall and so it could not be removed, that the rates were not yet mentioned on in the stock register was not shown. It is for these reasons that the seizure was effected according to the mahazar.

(2.) The learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner vehemently contended that such seizure is highly illegal, arbltrary and capricious.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the writ petitioner stated so, because, even if rates are not mentioned on the rate board in the early morning, it would not be an offence, because, the rates have to be mentioned on the commencement of the transaction on each day. Further she submitted that even if the rates are not mentioned on the board, the concerned order namely, the Essential Articles (Display of prices) Order, 1966 would not enable the officer to seize the articles. The learned Counsel invited my attention to Rule 4 of that Order which reads :