JUDGMENT

I. M. QUDDUSI, J. : By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed by the Dis¬trict Magistrate, Mayurbhanj dated 8th September, 2006 under Sections 3(1) and 3(2) of the Prevention of Black-Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980, (for short. “The Act”), directing detention of the petitioner under the aforesaid Act which was served on the petitioner on 11.9.2006 while she was detained in Circle Jail, Baripada. Pursuant to the impugned order, the petitioner has been detained since 8.9.2006 although the impugned order was served on the petitioner together with the grounds of detention on 11.9.2006.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was granted licence of a Sub-whole sale Dealership to deal in Kero¬sene oil under the public distribution system for Nuagaon and Kapadia Sub-Depots under the Saraskanda Block for the year 1996-97, which was renewed from time to time and it was lastly renewed on 1.4.2004 for a period of three years up to 31st March 2007 under the Orissa Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2002. On 3rd September, 2006, some villagers detained a pick-up van, Tata make No.OR-11B-8762 at Brushabhanupur at Birika Chhak and the same was found to be carrying nine barrels of kerosene oil. The Marketing Inspector, Sarskana as well as the police personnel reached the spot and conducted a joint inspection. The driver of the vehicle could not produce any document. Thereafter, the Marketing Inspector had gone to the Sub-wholesale depot of the petitioner on 4th September 2006 and made an inspection of the registers and a physical verification of the stock. The petitioner had taken a stand that she had sold 1950 liters of kerosene oil to retailer Sri Sudam Chandra Murmu of village Damana Sahi on the basis of a telephonic message from him and had also issued the stock in favour of one Sri Birendra Nath Patra, a retailer of village Ratila, but did not collect any money from him. Thereafter, the I.O. (Marketing Inspector) inquired from the two retailers who had denied to have purchased any kerosene oil on 3rd September 2006. The kerosene oil with vehicle and the stock available in the Sub-wholesaler depot were seized and the prosecution report under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act was filed. It is also alleged in the counter affidavit that in the year 2004 the petitioner has admitted to have committed mistakes in distribution and some quantity of kerosene oil were also seized and she was also suspended from lifting of further quota of kerosene oil. However, ultimately license of the peti¬tioner was at that time restored revoking the suspension. The im¬pugned detention order has been passed on the grounds quoted below :

“Under the above circumstances and after taking into account all the material facts and factors of this case, it is necessary at once to restore the supply of the kerosene oil to the community. The I.O. has prayed that to prevent Smt. Jayanti¬bala Sahu from diverting further quantities of kerosene oil to black-marketing, it is essential to detain her under Section 3 (1) and 3(2) of Prevention of Black-Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980. In the present instance, I am satisfied that you, Smt. Jayantibala Sahu were dealing in kerosene oil with a view of making gains in a manner that tends to defeat the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, namely, by preventing the people from getting their entitled quantities of kerosene oil, and you were diverting kerosene oil to black-marketing with intentions of profiteering by selling it to a person who is not the concerned retailer, an act that violates Clause 3 (2) of Orissa PDS Control Order 2002. I am satisfied that your immediate detention is necessary to pre¬vent you from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of kerosene oil, an essential commodity, and in the interest of the people of