SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Ori) 663

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
V. Gopala Gowda, B.N. Mahapatra, JJ.
S. BADRI NARAYAN PATRO ` BADRINATH - APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA AND ANOTHER - RESPONDENT
Writ Petition (C) No. 17844 of 2010
Decided On : 30-11-2010

The obligation of the Government to afford the detenu an opportunity to make representation is distinct from the Government's obligation to refer the case of the detenu along with the representation to the Advisory Board to enable it to form its opinion and send a report to the Government.

Headnote:

Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act - Detention Order - Sections 3(1) and 3(2) - Clauses 4, 7, 9, 10 and 14 of the Orissa Rice and Paddy Procurement (Levy) and Restrictions on Sale and Movement Order, 1982

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a managing director and proprietor of rice mills, was detained under the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act based on allegations of illegal dealing in essential commodities like rice and paddy.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was no independent consideration of the petitioner's representation by the State Government, constituting a violation of the constitutional right under Article 22 of the Constitution of India and a failure to discharge the statutory function of the State Government under Section 8 of the Act.

Issues: Non-consideration of the petitioner's representation by the State Government, violation of constitutional right under Article 22 of the Constitution of India, failure to discharge the statutory function of the State Government under Section 8 of the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The obligation of the Government to afford the detenu an opportunity to make representation is distinct from the Government's obligation to refer the case of the detenu along with the representation to the Advisory Board to enable it to form its opinion and send a report to the Government. The right to have the representation considered by the Government is safeguarded by Clause (5) of Article 22 and it is independent of the consideration of the detenu's case and his representation by the Advisory Board.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned orders were quashed. The detenu-petitioner was directed to be released forthwith if his detention was not required in connection with any other criminal case pending against him.

JUDGMENT :

V. Gopala Gowda, C.J. - This writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner-detenu praying to quash the order of detention dated 11.8.2010 (Annexure-1) passed by the Collector and District Magistrate, Ganjam under Sections 3(1) and 3(2) of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as well as the order dated 23.9.2010 (Annexure-4) passed by the State Government u/s 12(1) read with Section 13 of the aforesaid Act confirming the order of detention passed by the Collector & District Magistrate against the Petitioner urging various legal contentions.

2. The facts of the case are that the Petitioner is the Managing Director and proprietor of Simla Silk Sortex Rice Mill and Biswanath Rice Mill located at Surada in the district of Ganjam. The aforesaid two mills deal in rice and paddy as Miller Agent-cum-Custom Miller for different Government agencies including Orissa State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. for delivery of common raw rice. On the basis of allegation that the Petitioner is involved in illegal dealing in essential commodities like rice and paddy, the allegation was enquired into by a team of officers which conducted raid in the godown and premises of the aforesaid two Mills on 7.6.2010. During raid, one of the workers present produced six numbers of purchase and stock registers of both the Mills but he failed to produce other relevant and required documents for verification. The team found entries of purchase of paddy in the Purchase Register of Simla Silk Sortex Mill. They also verified some of the receipts as per the said register regarding purchase and payment of minimum support price to the farmers named therein. To ascertain the genuineness of the entries, the named farmers were contacted but they denied to have sold any paddy or to have received any cheque from the Petitioner that has been mentioned in the register to have been issued to them. The team further found that Biswanath Rice Mill is a Boiler Plant, which was found to be in operational condition and producing both common raw rice and common boiled rice in the mill without any permission for producing the same. There was also boiled paddy on the drying yard and boiling tank and huge stock of boiled rice in heaps at the rice milling outlet point of the Mill from which the team was of the opinion that the Petitioner had indulged in illegal trading of boiled rice when he was appointed as custom miller for common raw rice. He had also not maintained separate registers for each mill which according to the team was apparently done to avoid inspection by higher authorities. In the register the Petitioner had shown to have issued four cheques in favour of the farmers in token of payment of minimum support price but the concerned farmers denied to have received the cheques. Also the cheques had not been presented for encashment till the order of detention was passed. The team also found that there was no signature of the farmers on the vendor receipts issued by the Petitioner. On verification of the stock, the team found that there was shortage of Q, 342.87.200 of paddy and excess of Q. 85.00 of common raw rice. Therefore there was contravention of the provisions of Clauses 4, 7, 9, 10 and 14 of the Orissa Rice and Paddy Procurement (Levy) and Restrictions on Sale and Movement Order, 1982. Accordingly, action u/s 6(A) of the Essential Commodities Act was initiated and prosecution report u/s 7 of the said Act was filed. Further the investigating officer filed report for detaining the Petitioner u/s 3(1) of the Act so as to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community. On the basis of the aforesaid, the Collector & District Magistrate was satisfied that the Petitioner has been committing offence punishable under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act read with the Orissa Rice and Pad














Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top