JAYANTIBALA SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed by the District Magistrate, Mayurbhanj dated 8th September, 2006 under Sections 3(1) and 3(2) of the Prevention of Black -Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980, (for short. "The Act"), directing detention of the petitioner under the aforesaid Act which was served on the petitioner on 11.9.2006 while she was detained in Circle Jail, Baripada. Pursuant to the impugned order, the petitioner has been detained since 8.9.2006 although the impugned order was served on the petitioner together with the grounds of detention on 11.9.2006.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was granted licence of a Sub -whole sale Dealership to deal in Kerosene oil under the public distribution system for Nuagaon and Kapadia Sub -Depots under the Saraskanda Block for the year 1996 -97, which was renewed from time to time and it was lastly renewed on 1.4.2004 for a period of three years up to 31st March 2007 under the Orissa Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2002. On 3rd September, 2006, some villagers detained a pick -up van, Tata make No.OR -11B -8762 at Brushabhanupur at Birika Chhak and the same was found to be carrying nine barrels of kerosene oil. The Marketing Inspector, Sarskana as well as the police personnel reached the spot and conducted a joint inspection. The driver of the vehicle could not produce any document. Thereafter, the Marketing Inspector had gone to the Sub -wholesale depot of the petitioner on 4th September 2006 and made an inspection of the registers and a physical verification of the stock. The petitioner had taken a stand that she had sold 1950 liters of kerosene oil to retailer Sri Sudam Chandra Murmu of village Damana Sahi on the basis of a telephonic message from him and had also issued the stock in favour of one Sri Birendra Nath Patra, a retailer of village Ratila, but did not collect any money from him. Thereafter, the I.O. (Marketing Inspector) inquired from the two retailers who had denied to have purchased any kerosene oil on 3rd September 2006. The kerosene oil with vehicle and the stock available in the Sub -wholesaler depot were seized and the prosecution report under Section 6 -A of the Essential Commodities Act was filed. It is also alleged in the counter affidavit that in the year 2004 the petitioner has admitted to have committed mistakes in distribution and some quantity of kerosene oil were also seized and she was also suspended from lifting of further quota of kerosene oil. However, ultimately license of the petitioner was at that time restored revoking the suspension. The impugned detention order has been passed on the grounds quoted below :

(3.) THE Government approved the impugned detention order dated 8.9.2006 on 19.9.2006. The detention order thereafter was confirmed by the State Government vide order No.22225 dated 26.10.06 after obtaining opinion of the Advisory Board on 26.10.2006. A copy of the said confirmation order was sent to the Government of India, vide letter No.22538 dated 31.10.2006. The report regarding detention was already sent to the Govt. of India vide letter No.19564 dated 19.9.2006 by Speed Post.