ORDER

The present writ petition has though been filed for quashing the order dated 16.7.2019 passed by the District Magistrate, Samastipur under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 in Confiscation Case No. 127 of 2019, whereby and where-under the Bolero pick up vehicle in question bearing registration no. BR 33C 8772 has been confiscated, however, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not insisting for interference in the impugned order dated 16.7.2019, nonetheless, it is submitted that in terms of second proviso to section 6A(1) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, the petitioner is ready to pay the price of the confiscated article/articles in lieu of release of the vehicle in question. At this juncture it would be relevant to quote Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 herein below:—

“6A. Confiscation of foodgrains, edible oilseeds and edible oils.—(1) Where any essential commodity is seized in pursuance of an order made under section 3 in relation thereto, a report of such seizure shall, without unreasonable delay, be made to the Collector of the district or the Presidency town in which such essential commodity is seized and whether or not a prosecution is instituted for the contravention of such order, the Collector may, if he thinks it expedient so to do, direct the essential commodity so seized to be produced for inspection before him, and if he is satisfied that there has been a contravention of the order may order confiscation of—

(a) the essential commodity so seized;

(b) any package, covering or receptacle in which such essential commodity is found; and

(c) any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used in carrying such essential commodity:

Provided that without prejudice to any action which may be taken under any other provision of this Act, no foodgrains or edible oilseeds in pursuance of an order made under section 3 in relation thereto from a producer shall, if the seized foodgrains or edible oilseeds have been produced by him, be confiscated under this section:

Provided further that in the case of any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used for the carriage of goods or passengers for hire, the owner of such animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance shall be given an option to pay, in lieu of its confiscation, a fine not exceeding the market price at the date of seizure of the essential commodity sought to be carried by such animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance.”

2. The learned counsel appearing for the State, Shri Shailesh Kumar, AC to GP-5, has got no quarrel as far as the aforesaid provision of law is concerned.

3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the provision of law, as quoted herein above, as also taking into account the fact that no useful purpose would be served by not releasing the vehicle in question especially when the petitioner is ready to deposit the price of the seized article, which is to be determined in terms of Section 6C(2) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, this Court deems it fit and proper to direct the Collector, Samastipur to determine the price of the seized goods in terms of Section 6C(2) of the EC Act, which falls within the meaning and definition of ‘Essential Commodity’, as defined under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the rules therein, and upon deposit of the said amount, the vehicle in question, as aforesaid, of the petitioner herein shall be released free from all encumbrances, upon proper identification. It is further directed that the Collector, Samastipur shall pass appropriate orders in this regard within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.

4. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of.