Judgment

TULZAPURKAR, J. :- This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the Gujarat High Court dated Feb. 17, 1977 in Special Criminal Application No. 1 of 1977 filed under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution whereby the High Court reversed the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Broach in Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 1975 and sent the matter back to the learned Sessions Judge for passing an appropriate order in regard to the question as to whether the entire seized stock of exercise-books of the appellant or part thereof should be confiscated under S. 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The question raised in the appeal is whether exercise books are covered by the item "paper" occurring in S. 2 (a) (vii) of that Act as also in Entry 13 of Sch. I to the Gujarat Essential Articles Dealers (Regulation) Order, 1971?

2. The question arises in these circumstance : The appellant Maharaja Book Depot is a partnership firm dealing in books and stationery articles at Rajpipla, District Broach. Its shop was inspected and searched by the Mamlatdar or Rajpipla on July 4, 1975 when certain alleged irregularities came to light. During the search 78 gross exercise-books of controlled variety and 97 gross exercise-books of non-controlled variety were seized on the ground that the appellant had committed breaches of Cls. 3, 9 and 11 of the Gujarat Essential Articles Dealers (Regulation) Order 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the Regulation Order"), in that the appellant (a) did not display at any conspicuous part of the premises the opening stock of the exercise-books, (b) did not write the names of the customers on the bills issued to them for the sale of the exercise-books and (c) did not keep a register showing the stock of controlled and non-controlled exercise-books. A notice under S. 6-B of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was served by the Collector. Broach, calling upon the appellant to show cause why the seized stock of exercise-books should not be confiscated and after taking into consideration the explanation offered by the appellant the Collector by his order dated September 17, 1975 held that the appellant firm was guilty of the breaches of Cls. 3, 9 and 11 of the Regulation Order and directed that the entire seized stock be confiscated to the State Government under S. 6-A of the Act. The appellant preferred an appeal to the Sessions Court at Broach being Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 1975 and the learned Sessions Judge by his judgment and order dated Oct. 16, 1976 allowed that appeal and set aside the order of confiscation on the ground that the Act and the Regulation Order did not apply to the exercise-books inasmuch as an exercise-book which is a distinct commodity did not fall within the item "paper" enlisted as an essential commodity in S. 2 (a) (vii) of the Act and in Entry 13 of Sch. I to the Regulation Order. This order was challenged by the State of Gujarat in Special Criminal Application No. 1 of 1977 under Art. 227 of the Constitution. The High Court by its judgment and order dated Feb. 17, 1977 took the view that the item "paper" as enlisted both in S. 2 (a) (vii) of the Act and Entry 13 in Sch. I to the Regulation Order was wide enough to cover an exercise-book which was nothing but collection of papers stitched together by a piece of string or pinned with pins of stapler and quashed the order of the leanred Sessions Judge but instead of straightway confirming the Collectors confiscation order it remanded the appeal back to the Sessions Judge for passing an appropriate order after deciding the question as to whether the entire seized stock or a part thereof should be confiscated under S. 6-A of the Act. The appellant has challenged the legality and/or validity of the view taken by the High Court in this appeal.

3. In order to appreciate properly the submissions of counsel for the appellant on the construction of the expression "paper" occurring in