MITTAL TRADING COMPANY Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule Mr. Mankad learned A.G.P. waives service on behalf of the respondents. At the request of the learned Advocates for the respective parties, this petition is taken up for final hearing to-day.

(2.) This petition is filed under Art.226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 19-6-1996 passed by the State Government in appeal whereby the State Government has modified the order passed by the District Supply Officer, respondent No. 2 herein, who imposed penalty of confiscation of 25% of the goods seized valued at Rs. 15,156.00. However, by the impugned order, the State Government has in appeal preferred by the petitioner enhanced the quantity of commodities confiscated from 25% to 100%. The grievance made by the petitioner is that the State Government has no power to enhance the quantity of commodities confiscated, in absence of any cross-appeal or any notice issued to the petitioner by the State Government. Section 6(c) of the Essential Commodities Act deals with the appeal. Sub-S.(1) of S.6(c) which is relevant for our purpose reads as under :

(3.) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that no interference is called for so far as the Annexure-B passed by the respondent No. 2, i.e., District Supply Officer confiscating the goods in question to the extent of 25% and the same is, therefore, accordingly confirmed. The petition is accordingly allowed. The order Annexure-C dated 19-6-1996 passed by the respondent No. 1 is set aside. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.