K MADHUSUDHAN Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND COLLECTOR MAHABUBNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus filed on behalf of the detenu Kotrike Padmanabhaiah Setty of Gooty. The detenu is the Managing Partner of Sri Srinivasa Oil Trading Company, Gooty, Ananthapur district, which is a wholesale dealer in ground-nut oil and holds valid licence issued under the A.P. Scheduled Commodities Order, 1982. The trading company is the manufacturer and whole-saler in groundnut oil. The Inspector, Vigilance Cell, Civil Supplies Department, Mahaboobnagar, on some information, checked the vehicle passing through Balgera Border Civil Supplies Checkpost situate on Kurnool-Raichur road on the intervening night of 29/30-6-1986. On 30-6-1986 at 6.10 a.m. they intercepted lorry No. AAA 3377 carrying 50 barrels of ground-nut oil with a way-bill dated 28-6-1986 which showed that the 50 barrels of groundnut oil were loaded from the firm of A. Pandurangam Chetty, Madras for Nagpur with a covering letter containing the stamps and seals of Commercial Tax Department check posts of Tada in Nellore District, Nagari and Renigunta of Chittoor District and Agricultural Market Committee check posts of Gooty in Ananthapur District an Alampur in Mahaboobnagar district. On enquiry M. Jaleel driver of the lorry AAA 3377, Bojji cleaner of lorry AAA 3377 and Nittoor Rahasekhar clerk of M/s. Srinivasa Oil Trading Company, Gooty revealed that the 50 barrels of groundnut oil were loaded at Srinivasa Oil Trading Company, Gooty on 29-6-1986 evening and that the fake way-bill and the covering letter containing the stamps of check posts mentioned above were handed over to Nittoor Rajasekhar by the detenu on 29-6 1986 and they left the oil mill along with the lorry AAA 3377 with 50 barrels of groundnut oil loaded at the mill and these three persons also state that they did not touch Gooty check post while leaving Gooty. From the cabin of the lorry a bill dated 28-6-1986 with the way-bill No. 34 dated 28-6-1986 of M/s. Pushpanjali Trading Corporation, Hyderabad was found, according to which, coal was loaded in the lorry AAA 3377 on 28-6-1986 at Hyderabad and in the return journey the 50 barrels of groundnut oil were loaded from the factory of the detenu. The case was investigated and accounts were also scrutinised and the material was placed before the Detaining Authority, viz. the Government of Andhra Pradesh and exercising powers under Section 3(2)(a) read with Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act VII of 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the Government passed the order of detention on 28-8-1986 and the grounds were also served on the same day. Subsequently the Advisory Board confirmed the detention and the representation made by the detenu was rejected. Questioning the said detention order, the present writ petition is filed.

(2.) In the detention order it is mentioned that they are being satisfied that to prevent the detenu from further acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the country, it is necessary to make an order that the detenu should be detained. In the body of the letter it is mentioned that the detenu indulged in clandestine business in edible oil by transporting groundnut oil on the strength of fake documents in a speculative manner to other States contravening the Conditions 3(1) and 7(1) of the licence issued under Clause 3 of the A.P. Scheduled Commodities Dealers (Licencing and Distribution) Order, 1982 read with Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. In the grounds the details which are already mentioned are incorporated. It is mentioned that the statements of M. Jaleel and Nittoor Rajasekhar revealed that the oil was being transported to Nagpur under a fake way bill. It is also mentioned in the grounds that the oil was transported from A. Pandurangam Chetty as mentioned in the way bill. The operative portion of the grounds reads thus :

(3.) The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that there is no material to show that the accounts were not maintained correctly and that even otherwise there is no prohibition of transporting groundnut oil nor there is any Control Order fixing the price of the groundnut oil and therefore the charge that thee detenu indulged in clandestine business in a speculative manner is unfounded and therefore the said ground is irrelevant and non-existing and if even one ground is to be struck-down, the whole order becomes illegal.