Back
2011 Supreme(All) 656
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Sunil Ambwani, Kashi Nath Pandey, JJ.
Hardayal Milk Products Private Ltd.& others -Appellant
Versus
Milk Commissioner/Prescribed Authority & Ors -Respondent
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.51581 of 2010
Decided On : 07-03-2011
The power to seizure under the Control Order 1992 and the Essential Commodities Act is limited to specific items, and inspections by the Registering Authority are necessary to ensure compliance with prescribed standards.
Headnote:
Milk Dairy - Essential Commodities Act - Section 3, Section 6-A - Control Order-92
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the order of the District Magistrate rejecting their representation to de-seal the machines and equipments of a milk dairy, which was sealed for not having registration under the Milk & Milk Product Order 1992.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the sealing of the entire plant and machinery of the milk collection and chilling plant was not justified, especially after the dairy had been recorded in the registration certificate of another company and the certificate of registration was valid on the date of inspection.
Issues: The issues included the authority of the Sub Divisional Magistrate to seal the dairy, the validity of the registration certificate, and the standards of the plant and machinery used in the chilling plant.
Ratio Decidendi: The power to seizure under the Control Order 1992 and the Essential Commodities Act is confined to the offending essential commodity and specific items, and the sealing of the entire plant and machinery was not justified. The court also emphasized the need for inspections by the Registering Authority to ensure compliance with prescribed standards.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the orders sealing the dairy were set aside, and the petitioners were permitted to operate the dairy only after due inspections and satisfaction of prescribed standards by the Registering Authority.
We have heard Ms. Nandita Bharti for the petitioners. Shri C.S. Singh, Additional Chief Standing Counsel appears for the respondents.
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by an order of the District Magistrate, Etah dated 21.7.2010 passed in pursuance to the directions issued by this Court on 28.6.2010 in Writ Petition No. 36999 of 2010 (M/s Hardayal Milk Products Pvt. and others vs. District Magistrate and others), rejecting the petitioner's representation to de-seal the machines and equipments of M/s Lalkant Milk Dairy, Agra Road, Etah run by petitioner no.2.
3. In an inspection carried out by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Etah on 21.5.2010, it was found that M/s Lalkant Milk Dairy did not have the registration under the Milk & Milk Product Order 1992 (in short the Control Order-92), made by the Central Government in exercise of powers conferred upon it by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The Sub Divisional Magistrate sealed the two storage tanks; one chiller; one dump tank; one weighing machine; six milk pumps; complete pipeline; two compressors; generator sets; one over hand tank/tubewell; three road milk tankers and two milk van (tankari). A Case Crime No. 177 of 2010 under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act was registered against the dairy. The District Magistrate sent a letter to the State Registering Authority/Milk Commissioner, Dairy Development Department, U.P. Lucknow asking for clarification, on the objections taken by the petitioner no. 2, that under an agreement between petitioner no.1 and 2, M/s Lalkant Milk Dairy run by petitioner no.2, was validly entered into the expanded registration certificate of M/s Hardayal Milk Products Private Ltd-a private limited company, registered with the Central Registering Authority under the Control Order-92.
4. It is submitted by Ms. Nandita Bharti, that under the agreement dated 24.9.2009 between M/s Hardayal Milk Products Private Ltd. and M/s Lalkant Milk Dairy, Agra Road, Etah through Shri Lal Kant Yadav, the later was to run a unit for collection and chilling of Milk for M/s Hardayal Milk Products Private Ltd. An application was made by M/s Hardayal Milk Products Pvt. Ltd. to the Assistant Commissioner (DD), Food Safety and Standard Authority of India to revise the list of Milk Chilling Centres in the Registration Certificate No. 363/R-MMPO/2008. The application dated 26.12.2009 included M/s Lal Kant Milk Chilling Centre, Agra Road Etah, at item No. 4 of the six Chilling Centres, as a running unit. The necessary entry in the registration certificate was recorded on 26.5.2010. Prior to the making of the entry, under the agreement dated 24.9.2009 M/s Lal kant Milk Dairy, Agra Road, Etah was working as the unit for collecting and chilling the milk for M/s Hardayal Milk Products Private Ltd. The Milk Commissioner clarified this arrangement by his letter dated 27.8.2010 to the District Magistrate, Etah. He informed that the registration certificate has been amended, expanding the area of the collection of milk including four Chilling centres and that M/s Lalkant Milk Chilling Centre had entered into an agreement with M/s Hardayal Milk Products Private Ltd and an entry to that effect was made in the certificate of registration.
5. It is submitted by Ms. Bharti that though the District Magistrate, Etah had asked the Milk Commissioner to give information by his letters dated 16.6.2010 and 13.7.2010, without waiting for a reply, which was sent by the Milk Commissioner, U.P., on 27.8.2010, the District Magistrate passed the order rejecting the petitioner's application on 21.7.2010, to de-seal the chilling plant.
6. It is not necessary for us to go into the questions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner namely whether the Sub Divisional Magistrate had the powers of inspection and whether the entire milk centre could be sealed along with the machinery and apparatus by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, on the ground that he d
