CHUNIGAR UMRAOGAR GOSAI Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE RAJKOT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Will it is necessary for the detaining authority to take recourse to the Prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (the Act of 1980 for brief) for the purpose of preventing a person from indulging into objectionable or offending activities with respect to blackmarketing and maintenance of supply of essential commodities when such person can be prevented from indulging into such activities by resorting to the ordinary law in that regard ? This is one of the several questions arising before us in this Writ Petition filed by the detenu under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for challenging the legality and validity of the detention order passed by respondent No. 1 on 31/10/1990 at Annexure 'A' to this petition under Sec. 3 of the Act of 1980.

(2.) It appears that the petitioner held licence No. 29 issued to him under the relevant provisions contained in the Essential Commodities (Licence, Control and Declaration of Stock) Order, 1985, (the Order of 1985 for brief) framed under Sec. 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (the Act of 1955 for brief) for dealing in kerosene. It appears that his dealings were examined by certain Civil Supply Authorities on 28/08/1990, 22/10/1990 and 2 3/10/1990. It appears that several irregularities in his dealings were noticed. It cannot be gainsaid that these irregularities would constitute an offence punishable under the Act of 1955. Respondent No. 1, however, chose to issue an order at Annexure 'A' under Sec. 3 of the Act of 1980 ordering detention of the detenu. It appears to have been served to him on 31/10/1990 together with the grounds for detention of the even date. A copy of the grounds is at Annexure 'C' to this petition. The order of detention at Annexure 'A' is under challenge in this petition on several grounds.

(3.) The main ground pressed into service by and on behalf of the petitioner is to the effect that the impugned order of detention at Annexure 'A' suffers from the vice of non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority inasmuch as he has not considered the less drastic remedy available for preventing detenu from indulging into his so-called objectionable or offending activities before resorting to the Act of 1980 for the purpose. It has been urged before us that Sec. 12AA of the Act of 1955 is capable enough on prevent such person from indulging into his objectionable or offending activities as referred to in the grounds for detention at Annexure 'C' to this petition. This ground of challenge is taken by the petitioner in para 5(uuu) of the petition.