DHEDHIA TRADERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision petition, the petitioner-firm has challenged the order of confiscation of 7 tins of mustard oil made by the Collector Jhunjhunu under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as confirmed in appeal under Section 6-C of the Act by the State Government vide judgment dated, 15/10/1991.

(2.) In order to appreciate the controversy raised before me, necessary facts of the case may be given. On 12/08/1991 the Enforcement Inspector Jhunjhunu visited the business premises of the petitioner and noted certain irregularities in relation to conditions of the licence issued in name of the provisions of Rajasthan Trade Articles (Licencing and Control) Order, 1980 (for short 'the Order, 1980'). He seized 7 tins of mustard oil weighing 105 Kgs. on the ground that they were not entered in the stock-register. 20 bags of wheat were also seized, but the seizure of wheat is not related for the purpose of this revision. A seizure-memo of the articles was prepared by him. The seizure of the articles was reported to the Collector, Jhunjhunu under Section 6-A of the Act. It may be conveniently stated here that no criminal prosecution has been launched against the petitioner-firm or its partners for contravening the order of 1980 which is punishable under Section 7 of the Act. On receipt of the report, the Collector Jhunjhunu, initiated confiscation proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act in relation to the seized articles including 7 tins of mustard oil, which were seized from the business premises of the petitioner-firm. A show cause notice under Section 6-B was issued by the Collector to the partners of the firm for making representation in writing before him on 28/08/1991 against the grounds of confiscation mentioned in the notice. The ground for confiscation of mustard oil was stated that the seized 7 tins were entered in the stock register and there was a violation of condition No. 3(A) of the licence issued under the Order of 1980.

(3.) Upon service of notice, the partners of the firm filed their reply to the show cause notice and pleaded, inter alia, that there was no contravention of any condition of the licence, as the tins of mustard oil, in question, were purchased by the firm from M/s. Bhagirath Mal Anil Kumar, Chhavni Bazar, Jhunjhunu on 12-8-91 some time before the inspection was made by the Enforcement Inspector. It was also stated that the bill of the mustered oil was not sent by the aforesaid firm along with tins for pressure of work as there was 'Teej-fair' on that day and the petitioner-firm was informed that the bill would be sent very soon. According to them, these facts were intimated to the Enforcement Inspector at the time of checking, but no notice was taken by him in absence of the bill. It was also stated that the entry in stock register about 7 tins of mustard oil should be made before beginning of the transactions of the following day, as such, there was no contravention of the order, 1989. Thus, in short, the plea was that, firstly, there was no violation of any condition of licence and secondly, there was no dis-honest intention on their part in not making an entry of the mustard oil in the stock register. Alongwith the reply, as many as, 17 documents were filed including the bill about purchase of the mustard oil in question, issued by the firm M/s. Bhagirath Mal Anil Kumar on 12-8-91.