R RAMASAMY Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR COIMBATORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. C. Prakasam, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. V. Manoharan, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

(2.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that 64 bags of rice, which belonged to one Muthusamy was seized by the second respondent, on 20. 7. 1998, from Thulukkanthottathu Salai, Salapalayam, Annur, alleging that the goods belonged to the petitioner. The petitioner was also arrested on the same day and after being released on bail, the petitioner was issued with Section 6-B notice by the first respondent. Though the petitioner had been represented by a counsel before the first respondent during the Section 6-A enquiry, the 1st respondent had passed the order confiscating the entire goods and had given sanction order for prosecution against the petitioner by his proceedings in Na. Ka. 5531/98/k3, dated 27. 10. 1998, which has been challenged before this Court by way of the present writ petition.

(3.) THE claim of the petitioner is that the seized rice does not belong to him and that the petitioner was dealing with the rice on behalf of the small traders only as a commission agent and that the impugned order has been passed by the first respondent only on a misconception.