Jharkhand High Court
M/S Bharat Petrolium Corporati vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 9 January, 2014
Author: Narendra Nath Tiwari
Bench: Narendra Nath Tiwari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C.W.J.C No. 2814 of 2000(R)
M/S Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Ranchi ..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) & Others ..... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI
-----
For the Petitioner - M/s Delip Jerath, M.K.Roy
For the O.Ps - Mr. Arbind Kumar, J.C to G.P-II
-----
By Court: In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing (i) Letter No. 1529
dated 23.12.1999 (Annexure-1) (ii) Letter No. 506 dated 23.8.1999 and Letter No. 222 dated 23.2.2000 (Annexure-3), whereby the respondents have directed the petitioner to calibrate flow meter / bulk meter and storage tank installed for the purpose of storing petroleum products at the Dhanbad depot of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner is a Government Company under the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas Department. It deals in processing, sale and supply of petroleum products throughout the country. In order to facilitate distribution, sale and supply of petroleum products, the petitioner-Company has established depots throughout the country including the district of Dhanbad. The petroleum products in the depots are stored underground and aboveground storage tanks. From the said storage tanks, the petroleum products are supplied through tank lorries to various retail dealers. The storage of petroleum products is strictly maintained and controlled by the petitioner- Company. The supply made through the tank lorries is measured by Dip-Rod. The Dip-Rod is required to be calibrated, verified and stamped by the weight and measure authorities under the provisions of Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 [hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act of 1985']. The storage tanks installed in the depots are huge in size. It is not manually possible to remove such tanks from the place of installation. In order to regulate and control the outflow of products from huge tank to the tank lorry, the petitioner-Company has introduced the device flow meter / bulk meter in the storage tank. Those meters are not used as weights and measures so as to attract the provisions of the said Act of 1985. Those meters are used for internal convenience and are never used in course of transaction. The storage tank and bulk meter are not required to be calibrated, as required under Section 24(1) of the said Act of 1985.
3. Ignoring the said fact, the respondents sent Letter No. 1529 dated 23.12.1999 (Annexure-1) asking the petitioner to calibrate the storage tank and produce the relevant papers concerning the storage tank, failing which the petitioner was threatened with prosecution for violating the provision of Section 24(1) of the said Act of 1985.
4. The petitioner replied to the said letter stating, inter alia, that the storage tank is not a measuring instrument for any commercial transaction and the same is not required to be calibrated.
5. Although the respondents had no reason to send such notice, they had also issued Letter No.506 dated 23.8.1999 in the form of a show cause in the petitioner's Ranchi office, asking the petitioner regarding the use of bulk meter / Dip-Rod in filling oil from tank lorry to the storage tank.
6. The petitioner had again replied that the storage tank is not used as measurement instrument and the stock in the tank is measured by Dip-Rod.
7. Brushing aside the said reply of the petitioner, the respondents again sent Letter No. 222 dated 23.2.2000 (Annexure-3) asking the petitioner to calibrate the storage tank.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned letters are wholly arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and the same have been unnecessarily sent to the petitioner only to put them to harassment and embarrassment. The impugned letters are, thus, liable to be quashed.
9. The writ petition has been opposed by the respondents stating, inter alia, that the impugned letters were issued to the petitioner as they violated the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act of 1976') and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985. The petitioner-Company is dealing in the commercial transaction through the said depot, which comes under the purview of the provisions of Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 and they are bound by the provisions of the said Acts. Section 24(3) of the said Act of 1985 lays down that any weight or measure is such that it cannot, or should not, be moved from its location, the Inspector shall take such steps for the verification of such weight or measure at the place of its location, as may be prescribed. The provision of the said Act of 1985, thus, applies to the stationery tank or bulk meter.
10. It has been submitted that Section 22 of the said Act of 1985 prohibits use of measure for being used in any transaction for industrial production or for protection unless the same is verified and stamped. Stationery tanks and bulk meters are measuring instruments within the meaning of the said Act of 1976 as well as the said Act of 1985 and the same are required to be calibrated. Notices were issued to the petitioner asking them to follow the provisions of law, but they failed to respond. They did not also comply with the legal provisions. There is, thus, no illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned letters.
11. Whether the storage tank is a weighing or measuring instrument, is the relevant issue for consideration and decision in order to test validity of the impugned notices.
12. Section 2(zc) of the said Act of 1976 defines weighing or measuring instrument, which reads as follows:
"Weighing or measuring instrument means any object, instrument, apparatus or device, or any combination thereof, which is, or is intended to be used, exclusively or additionally, for the purpose of making any weighment or measurement and includes appliance, accessory or part associated with any such object, instrument, apparatus or device."
13. Section 22 of the said Act of 1985 prohibits sale or use of unstamped weights or measures, which runs as follows:
"22. Prohibition of sale or use of unstamped weights or measures - No weight or measure shall be sold, or offered or exposed or processed for sale, or used or kept for use in any transaction or for industrial production or for protection unless it has been verified and stamped.
Provided that nothing in this section shall apply to any Weight or measure which has been initially verified and stamped with a special seal referred to in sub-section (3) of Section 41 of the Standards Act."
Section 22, thus, prohibits sale or use of unstamped weights and measures.
14. Section 24(1) of the said Act of 1985 provides that every person having any weight or measure in his possession, custody or control in circumstances indicating that such weight or measures is being, or is intended or likely to be, used by him in any transaction or for industrial production or for protection, shall, before putting such weight or measure into such use, have such weight or measure verified at such place and during such hours as the Controller may, by general or special order, specify in this behalf (hereinafter referred to as the specified place or specified time), on payment of such fees, as may be prescribed.
15. The petitioner's categorical case is that storage tank at their Dhanbad Depot is not used for the purpose of commercial transaction. The same is used as a device for storage of petroleum products received from the refineries to avoid fire hazards and for safety of petroleum products. The petroleum products filled in the tank lorries are measured by calibrated Dip-Rods duly marked and stamped by the Metrology Department. The storage tank cannot be said to be an instrument used for measurement.
16. The fact that the storage tank at Dhanbad Depot is used only for the purpose of storage of petroleum products received from the refineries, has not been disputed by the respondents.
17. There is no material on record to establish that the storage tank at Dhanbad Depot of the petitioner is a weighing and measuring instrument attracting application of the provision of Section 24(1) of the said Act of 1985.
18. I, therefore, find no justification for issuing the impugned letters to the petitioner alleging violation of the provision of Section 24(1) of the said Act of 1985 or for insisting the petitioner for verification and stamping of the storage tanks.
19. In view of the above discussions, Letter No. 1529 dated 23.12.1999 (Annexure-1), Letter No. 222 dated 23.2.2000 (Annexure-3) and Letter No. 506 dated 23.8.1999 (Annexure-4) are wholly arbitrary and unwarranted and the same are, accordingly, quashed.
20. This writ petition is allowed.
(NARENDRA NATH TIWARI, J) Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated 9.1.2014 S.K/NAFR