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:
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