KUTTYKRISHAN PILLAI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was a retail distributor of Liquefied Petroleum Gas. On 26.11.2007, the Rationing Inspector attached to the office of the 2nd respondent inspected the godown of the petitioner and in the said inspection, irregularities were detected. On the basis of the above irregularities, the petitioner was served with Ext.P1 notice, for which the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 explanation. Thereafter, Ext.P3 order was passed by the first respondent, after hearing the petitioner and considering the contentions raised by the petitioner in Ext.P2 explanation. It was observed in Ext.P3 order that there was shortage of 103 filled LPG domestic cylinders, twelve empty LPG domestic cylinders and three empty commercial LPG cylinders. Two filled commercial cylinders (19 KG) and twelve empty commercial cylinders (5 Kg.) were found to be in excess in the inspection. The Stock Board and Stock Register were not maintained since 24.11.2007. The Back Log of filled cylinders booking were not shown since 10.10.2007. As per Ext.P3 order, the first respondent directed the petitioner to pay a fine of Rs.1,91,874/- within a period of 7 days from the date of receipt of Ext.P3 order.

(2.) Heard both sides.

(3.) It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no provision under Sec. 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') to award fine for the violation of Sec. 3 of the Act and in the said circumstances, the order impugned is not sustainable. The learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand supported the order impugned and contended that this revision petition is not maintainable in view of the statutory remedy of appeal under Sec. 6C of the Act.