JINTO TRADERS Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner in the Original Petition and the appellant in the Writ Appeal is one and the same person. The Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment dated 28.1.1999 in O. P. No. 1992 of 1999. The challenge in the Original Petition is against Ext. P11 order passed by the District Collector, Trichur. Ext. P11 is dated 31.3.1999. After the filing of the appeal, the appellant amended the appeal memorandum by incorporating the ground challenging Ext. P11. He also filed the Original Petition challenging the same order. Since the appellant and the petitioner is the same person, it will be described as the petitioner in the case. The facts of the case are as follows:

(2.) The petitioner is a licensed wholesale dealer under the Kerala Sugar Dealers Licensing Order, 1967. Its license Number is 49 / Trichur. The petitioner carries on the business as a wholesale dealer in sugar in the premises in Shop No. 633 of Ward No. 26 of the Trichur Municipality. It is also a wholesale dealer in rice licensed under the Kerala Food Grains Dealers Licensing Order, 1967. The petitioner has been issued a licence under the Kerala Food Grains Dealers Licensing Order for the premises in shop No. 128 (Old 109) of Ward 10 of Trichur Municipality. According to the petitioner, both these rooms are on the opposite of one road, namely, Rice Bazaar Road.

(3.) In December, 1998, the petitioner purchased 135 bags of free sale sugar weighing 135 quintals from EID Parry, Madras and from Jino and Company. On the consignment being brought to the place of business, the petitioner found that there is no sufficient space in the shop bearing No. 26/633 and hence, as an interim arrangement and on account of paucity of space, the said 135 bags of sugar were kept in the godown situate in Door No. 128. The 135 bags of sugar were entered in the stock register of the petitioner maintained under the provisions of the Kerala Sugar Dealers Licensing Order, 1967. On 4.12.1998, the Taluk Supply Officer, Trichur conducted an enquiry in the premises, Door No. 10/128 (Old 10/109). Since the sugar was kept in that premises, which was noted in the licence issued under the Kerala Sugar Dealers Licensing Order, the Taluk Supply Officer seized the entire 135 bags of sugar. Thereafter, it was entrusted on a kychit to the representatives of the petitioner subject to the condition that the stock will be delivered at the place and at the time required by the Taluk Supply Officer. According to the petitioner, the seizure of the sugar is illegal, since he is the licensee under the Sugar Dealers Licensing Order. He filed a representation to the District Collector seeking the release of the sugar. But since no action was taken, he approached this Court by filing O. P. No. 24961 of 1998 praying for appropriate relief against the seizure of 135 bags of sugar. This Court disposed of the matter directing the District Collector to pass appropriate orders. Thereafter, the District Collector issued notice to the petitioner to appear before him. An argument note was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Thereafter, the District Collector passed Ext. P6 order. Ext. P6 order, the District Collector ordered confiscation of the sugar.