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

2023 Supreme(Online)(MP) 8177

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT GWALIOR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV

ON THE 22nd OF AUGUST, 2023

CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 838 of 2012

BETWEEN:-

PRIYA MAHILA PRATHMIK UPBHOKTA

SAHAKARI BHANDAR KEROSENE SEMI

WHOL SELLERS BLOCK DABRA, DISTT.

GWALIOR, THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT SMT.

SHARDA AGRAWAL W/O SHIR MUNNA LAL

AGRAWAL

R/O

HARISHANKARPURAM,

THROUGH MANAGER-KALLURAM KEWAT

S/O

GOVIND

DAS

KEWAT,

R/O

DHEEMERPURA

DABRA,

DISTRICT

GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER

(BY SHRI SANJAY BAHRANI - ADVOCATE)

AND

STATE OF M.P. THROUGH COLLECTOR

(FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLY), GWALIOR

(MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT

(SHRI DHEERAJ KUMAR BUDHOLIYA – PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed the

following:

Advocates:
Sanjay Bahirani,Mukesh Kushwah,Advocate General

1.

This petition is filed under Section 397/401 of the Criminal

2

Procedure Code against the order dated 11.10.2012 passed in Cr.A.

No435/2012 passed X-Additional Session Judge, Gwalior by which

appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed and confirmed the order of

the Collector 11.9.2012 passed in case No.77/11-12/B-121 wherein under

Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act 1955, 24000/- liter blue

kerosene of petitioner society has been confiscated, deposit security of

Rs.500/- has been forfeited and license of the petitioner society was

cancelled.

2.

The facts in brief to decide this petition are that the petitioner is a

cooperative society which registered under Section 9 of the M.P. Co-

operative Society 1960. The petitioner is doing his work of kerosene

under the M.P. Kerosene Dealer Licensing Order 1979 (herein after

referred as the “ Order 1979”) for that Collector Gwalior has issued

license No.7 of semi wholes seller under the provision of Order 1979 to

the petitioner for distributing the kerosene to fair price shop keeper.

3.

On 27.9.2011 at about 12-45 p.m. Under instruction of the District

Supply Officer, Civil Supply Officer accompanied by other officer, Shri

Vipini Kumar Shrivastav inspected the premises of petitioner and found

that despite having given notice no body responsible person was present

in the said premises; therefore, at that time Inspecting Authority has

informed to the manager of semi whole seller Licensee; however, he did

not appear. During inspection, in 2-10 Tanker 24000/- liter blue kerosene

was found which was to be distributed in public distribution. At the time

of inspection price and stock list was not exhibited on inspection date on

unauthorized godown and also, in the said premises stock, distribution

3

register and bill book etc were not find to be kept, nor it were produced

for inspection that being so, on the basis of said allegation kerosene was

seized by the inspecting authority and same was given on supurdgi to the

wholesale dealer, thereafter, sample of the kerosene were collected and

panchnama was prepared. Thereafter, a show cause notice in respect to

confiscation of seized 24000/- liter kerosene for canceling the license, for

forfeiting the security show cause notice has been issued on

29.9.2011(Annexure-P-4). Thereafter, reply to the said show cause notice

was filed and denied the allegation leveled against the petitioner.

Statement of Assistant Supply Officer Vipin Shrivastava was taken. On

the basis of statement made by the Inspecting Authority and hearing the

parties, the Collector passed the order for confiscation of kerosene oil and

license has also been cancelled. Seized kerosene has been confiscated on

11.9.2012.

4.

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the Collector, the

petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 6-C of the Essential

Commodities Act before the Sessions Judge, Gwalior which was

dismissed by impugned order. The petitioner has also filed another appeal

against the order of cancellation of license before the Commissioner,

Gwalior under Section 16 of the M.P. Kerosene Dealer Licensing Order,

1979 which was allowed.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that impugned orders of

respondents are highly illegal, and contrary to law and deserves to be set

aside. The learned Collector and Appellate Court did not consider the

material available on record and ignore the statement of Vipin Shrivastav

4

who has not corroborated the case of respondents. It is further argued that

the Collector and First Appellate Court have not considered the principle

of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case N. Nagendra Rao vs.

State of M.P. 1994 AIR S.C. Page No.2663 in which the Appex Court has

quashed such type of confiscation proceeding. Learned Courts below

have also not considered the law laid down in the case of Manoj Anna

Bhandar vs. Collector and Licensing Authority, Gwalior reported in

2003 (1) EFR page No.632 wherein it has been held that

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top