RAM NARAYAN SAW Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the writ petitions have been preferred by common petitioner, Ram Narayan Saw with two different prayer for same sets of fact.

(2.) IN WP (C) 3475/2001, while the petitioner made prayer for direction on the respondents to unseal the business premises and godown, in question, which was sealed on 4th July, 2000 by the Additional District Supply Officer. Latehar - - ADSO for short -along with the Market Secretary, Latehar; in WP (C) 3476/2001, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 7th August. 2000, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau in Misc. (Supply) Case No. 114 of 2000 -01, rejecting the prayer of petitioner to release the seized commodities like rice, aata, maida, wheat, and pulses which were confiscated under Section 6A of the E.C. Act

(3.) THE petitioner initially moved against the - order of confiscation before the Ranchi Bench of Patna High Court in CWJC No. 2515 of 2000 (R), but it was withdrawn to move the appellate authority. The petitioner preferred appeal before the Food Commissioner, Government of Bihar but, in the meantime vide a Notification dated 5th October, 2000, the power was vested with the District Judge under Section 6 of the E.C. Act.