The main legal point established is the requirement to adhere to scientific analysis reports, provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and follow the principles of natural justice in proceedings involving the seizure of goods.

ORDER :

1. W.P.No.41806 of 2022 is filed to declare the action of Respondent Nos.4 & 5 in seizing the Lorry bearing No.AP 39 TU 7275 and 5500 Liters of Waste oil through Panchanama dated 04.06.2022 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, with a consequential direction to the respondents to release Lorry bearing No.AP 39 TU 7275 and 5500 Liters of Waste oil.

2. W.P.No.1480 of 2023 is filed to issue Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to orders in V1/CS/106/Rjy/202 dated 12.01.2023 on the file of the third respondent, quash the same, with a consequential direction to the respondents to release Lorry bearing Registration No.AP 39 TU 7275 & AP 36 TA 9889 and 5500 Liters of Waste oil.

3. Both these writ petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the same petitioners, as such, I find it expedient to decide both the writ petitions by common order.

4. The facts of the case are that, the petitioner conducts a business involving the purchase of waste oil from various states through invoice. This waste oil serves multiple purposes, such as fueling boiler steam and servicing lorry engines, without necessitating a licensing requirement. On 04.06.2022, the CSDT, Rajamahendravaram along with officials conducted surprise check on the petitioner’s premises and seized 5500 liters of waste oil along with Lorry bearing Registration No.AP 39 TU 7275 & AP 36 TA 9889 under the cover of Panchanama dated 04.06.2023, on the ground that the petitioner did not obtain ‘No Objection Certificate’ from the District Collector; Form-B license from the Civil Supplies Department and explosive license. The petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents, asserting that the oil in question is solely waste oil and not classified as bio-diesel. Thereafter, the respondents sent samples to NSR Industries, Peddapuram for scientific analysis and opinion, which opined that the subject oil is not bio-diesel. Even though an opinion was obtained from NSR Industries, classifying the subject oil as not ‘bio-diesel’ or ‘petroleum product’, the Collector (Civil Supplies), East Godavari District, Rajamahendravaram passed orders on confiscating 100% of the seized Oil to Government and imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- per each vehicle (Total Rs.20,000/-) payment to Government through Challan u/s 6A of the E.C. Act, 1955. The Collector further directed the Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Rajamahendravaram to collect the said confiscated amount and vehicles penalty amount and remit the same to the Government. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petitions are filed challenging the proceedings dated 12.01.2023 and consequently to release the lorry bearing Registration Nos.AP 39 TU 7275 & AP 36 TA 9889 and the confiscated oil.

5. In W.P.No.1480 of 2023, a counter affidavit has been filed by the Respondent No.2 – District Collector (Civil Supplies), East Godavari District. He submits that, though the petitioner is claiming it to be waste oil, it is found out that the oil is a by-product of petroleum. It is submitted in the counter affidavit that, as per Clause 2(d) of the Motor Spirit and High-Speed Diesel (Prevention of Malpractices in Supply and Distribution) Order, 1990, High Speed Diesel means any hydrocarbon oil (excluding mineral colza oil and turpentine substitute) which has its flash point at or above 25 degree Celsius and is suitable for use as fuel in compression ignition engines. The samples of lab report clearly shows that flash point below 300C and Sulphur percentage is 49%. Hence, it is flammable item, so the person who purchased the oil from the writ petitioner is being filled directly into the vehicles as it is suitable for use as fuel in compression ignition engines, thus it is considered as one type of diesel products under the purview of petroleum products and requested to dismiss the writ petitions.

6. A reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioner, denying m