MYSORE INDUSTRIES DALL MILL Vs. DY COMMR GULBURGA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is the case of the writ petitioners in these petitions that the Sub Inspector of Police along with the authorities of the Food Department raided their shops in the night between 1st and 2nd March 1981 and that they seized several bags of thur dal. IT is the further case of the writ petitioner in W. P. No. 4925 of 1981 that they have seized in addition to thur dal and thur, 170 bags of thur under processing 14 bags of thill, 43 bags of pundi 38 bags of linseed and 7 bags of udid dal. IT is the case of the writ petitioners in these cases that the inspecting officers should visit the shops only in the business hours and not in the nights and that therefore their raid is illegal. IT is further their case that they have not committed breach of any condition of the order or the conditions in the licence and therefore the seizure of the articles in all these cases by the Sub-Inspector of Police is without jurisdiction and so the same should be quashed in each case. Learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners invited my attention to the Karnataka Pulses Dealers Licensing Order, 1977. Rule 7 of the Rules reads thus: - "7. Maintenance of Accounts.- (1) Every dealer shall maintain a register of daily accounts of his stocks of Pulses showing the following particulars namely: - (a) the opening stock on each day; (b) the quantities received during the day showing the place from where and the source from which the same are received; (c) the quantities delivered or otherwise removed during the day; and (d) the closing stock at the end of the day. (2) Every dealer shall complete his accounts for each day before the commencement of business of the next working day. Thus it is clear that before commencement of business of the next working day, the dealer is expected to mention the opening stock after closing the stock for the previous day. IT is the case of the writ petitioners that they were to show their opening stock before they commenced business on 2-3-81 as the 1st March was a Sunday. But the raiding party raided the shops in the night between Islt and 2nd and they seized the articles in the early morning and as such there was no occasion for the writ petitioners either to show their closing balance or opening balance in the stock registers for sub-rule (2) of Rule 7 of the Rules says that every dealer shall complete his accounts for each day before commencement of business of the next working day. That being so, it is their grievance that the raiding party having prevented them from writing the closing stock for the previous day and the opening stock for the next working day, cannot complain that such stocks were not entered in the stock registers. Hence learned counsel for the writ petitioners submitted that the seizure is illegal, arbitrary and capricious, in each case. The learned High Court Government Pleader no doubt submitted that these contentions may be raised before the Deputy Commissioner when an enquiry is held under S. 6A of the Essential Commodities Act. IT is true that the Deputy Commissioner is empowered under the Act to hold an enquiry with regard to the seized articles. But that does not prevent a person who complains that the seizure was made without authority and jurisdiction to approach this court under writ jurisdiction as what is done is highly illegal, improper and capricious and therefore it should be quashed. If, prima facie the seizur4, was in accordance with law, then there is no doubt that the proper authority to enquire into the matter would be the Deputy Commissioner under S. 6(A) of the Essential Commodities. Act. On the facts of the present cases, it is so obvious that the seizure is not done in accordance with law and the illegality is lit large on the face of it. Hence this court has not only power to quash such seizure but it is its bounden duty to interfere with the seizure which is highly illegal, arbitrary and capricious. Time of enforcement is contemplated in Rule 11 of the Rules referred to above which reads thus: 11. Dealer to give facilities for inspection: - Every Dealer shall give all facilities at all reasonable times to any Enforcement Officer for inspection of his stocks and account at any shop, godown or other place used by him for the storage, sale or purchase of pulses. In the licensing condition which is in Form 'B' under Rule No. 4, it is stated thus,- "The licensee shall give all facilities at all reasonable times during the normal working hours of his business concern to the licensing authority or any officer authorised by him for inspection of his stocks and accounts. Thus, it is obvious that the inspecting officers are expected to visit the shop during the normal working hours. If the raiding is at the dead of night when people are expected to go to sleep, it would certainly amount to invasion of the liberty of the citizens which has to be very much regrettetd, as it is in the present case. The material on record shows that as many as four shops were raided. The first panchanama was commenced at 6-00 AM. in the shop of the' writ petitioner in W.P. No. 4925 of 1981, viz., Nandi Dal and Oil Industries. The mahazar shows that the panchaname commenced at 6-00 A.M. and in that shop, the panchanama shows that 185 bags of thur dal, 469 bags of thur, 170 bags of thur under processing, 14 bags of thill, 43 bags of pundi, 38 bags of linseed and 7 bags of Udid dal were seized. IT is further seen from the mahazar that thur dal and thur were put in bags and thereafter counted. All this, at a normal estimate, would take atleast two hours. They have done this not only in this shop, but in three other shops. That clearly shows, as challenged in the writ petitions, that their shops were raided after mid-night between 1st and 2nd March 1981. IT is for that reason that I say that the action of the Sub-Inspector of Police is highly arbitrary, illegal and as such regrettable. That apart, in the mahzars it is shown that the articles are seized because stocks were not shown in the stock registers. I have already explained above that stocks are to be shown in the stock registers every day at the commencement of the transactions for the day, and the stock for the previous day also has to be closed before commencing the transaction of the next day, vide R. 7 (2). That being so, if the sub-Inspector of Police raids the shops in the night and does not give opportunity to these merchants to show the closing stock and mention the opening stock in the morning before they commence the transactions, (usually the time for commencing the 'transaction being about 10 A.M.), he cannot be heard to say that the stocks were not shown in the Registers he himself having prevented them from doing so IT is thus 'manifest the seizure of articles in these cases are highly illegal, capricious and arbitrary. Hence the question of enquiry under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act does not arise. IT may further be mentioned in this context that in the case of Nandi Dal and Oil Industries, which is the subject matter of WP No. 4925 of 1981, the Sub-Inspector has seized Thill, pundi and linseed even though there was no discrepancy in the closing stock and the actual stock, which is manifestly illegal and improper. For. these reasons, I am satisfied that the seizure in each case is highly illegal, arbitrary and capricious and hence the writ petitions are entitled to succeed. In the result, the four writ petitions are allowed. Rule issued in each case is made absolute and the respondent, viz the Deputy Commissioner, Gulbarga District, Gulbarga, is hereby directed to release the seized stocks in each of the four cases mentioned above to the writ petitioners within ten days of the receipt of this direction on taking acknowledgments from them. Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file his memo of apperance for the respondent in each case within two weeks.