DHARAM PAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment of mine would dispose of CWP Nos. 7922. 7976 of 1988, 2663, 2975, 2976, 8520, 9475, 9919, 10436, 10684, 10689, 13276, 13554, 13593, 13690, 14368, 14694 and 15268 of 1989, as they arise out of similar orders canceling various licenses of the petitioners granted to them under the Inseticides Act, 1968. At the outset it is necessary to observe that in some cases appeals were filed and they were rejected whereas in other cases, the licencees have approached this Court in writ jurisdiction during the pendency of the appeals which were filed by them before the appellate authorities. As has been averred, petitioners were carrying on the business of sale of insecticides for quite some time under licenses granted to them by the Licensing Officer under the Insecticides Act, 1968. They were carrying on the trade of retail sale of insecticides in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The agricultural Inspectors visited the premises of the petitioners and took the samples of insecticide which were ultimately found to be mis-branded. The cases of the petitioners precisely before the authorities were that they had purchased the insecticides from the manufacturers who were duly registered with Central Insecticides Board.

(2.) THE counsel for the petitioners have submitted before me that all these cases are covered by a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court given in the case of Kissan Beej Bhandar v. Chief Agricultural Officer and Anr. , Civil Appeal No. 4612 of 1989 in S. L. P. No. 6661 of 1984, decided on 10. 11. 1989 and reported in 1992 Current Criminal Reports 768. I have gone through the decided case. It has been held in M/s. Kissan Beej Bhandar (Supra) that protection of Sub-section (3) Section 30 is available to a licensee not only when he is sought to be prosecuted but even when he is alleged to have contravened other provisions of the Act. In the present cases, the samples were found to be mis-branded. Since admittedly the insecticides the samples of which were taken from the petitioners were purchased by them from registered licensed manufacturers, the ratio of law laid in M/s. Kissan Beej Bhandar case (Supra) is fully applicable to the facts of the instant cases.