Kerala High Court
M/S.Hsil Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 26 July, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 4TH SRAVANA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 30169 OF 2014
PETITIONER/S:
M/S.HSIL LIMITED
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 2,
RED CROSS PLACE, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL-700001
AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT 304,
ASHOKA BHOOPAL CHAMBER, S.P. ROAD,
SECUNDERABAD-500003. AND KERALA OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR,
HEAVENLY PLAZA CIVIL LANE ROAD, PADAMUGHAL,
KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682028.
BY ADVS. SRI.BIJU BALAKRISHNAN
SMT.PRINCY XAVIER
SMT.V.S.RAKHEE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 CONTROLLER OF LEGAL METROLOGY
VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.
3 THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER/INSPECTOR
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR OF LEGAL METROLOGY
VATAKARA CIRCLE-2, KOZHIKODE-673101.
4 THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER/INSPECTOR
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR OF LEGAL METROLOGY,
NORTH GATE, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686141.
5 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS,
W.P.(C) No.30169 of 2014 2
NEW DELHI-100001.
BY ADVS. SRI.JAISHANKAR V.NAIR, CGC ASSISTANT
SOLICITOR GENERAL
SRI. A.J VARGHESE- SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
15.7.2024, THE COURT ON 26.7.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.30169 of 2014 3
EASWARAN S. , J.
-------------------------
W.P.(C) No.30169 of 2014
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of July 2024
JUDGMENT
The challenge raised in the present Writ Petition is with regard to the proceedings initiated by the respondents under the provisions of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 and Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011.
2. The petitioner is a Limited Company engaged in the business of manufacturing, marketing and sale of various products mainly sanitary wares and fittings, in the trade name and mark 'hindware'. According to the petitioner, the products which are manufactured by them will not come within the purview of the Legal Metrology Act 2009. By Ext.P2, the petitioner was served with a show cause notice issued from the Office of the Inspector, Legal Metrology, Vatakara, the 3rd respondent herein. By Ext.P3, the petitioner was further directed to produce various documents W.P.(C) No.30169 of 2014 4 for the purpose of inspection of the department. A seizure receipt, Ext.P4, was also issued by the 4th respondent.
3. Separate counter affidavits have been filed by respondents 3 and 5 controverting the contentions raised by the petitioner in the Writ Petition. According to the respondents, the contention of the petitioner that the products manufactured by him will not come within the purview of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 cannot be sustained.
4. I have heard Sri. Biju Balakrishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. T.K. Vipindas, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the 5 th respondent.
5. The question as to whether the pre-packed commodity with a predetermined value would come under the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 has considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Union of India v. Godrej GE Appliances Ltd. [2008 (3) KLT W.P.(C) No.30169 of 2014 5 694]. In the aforesaid judgment the Division Bench of this Court has specifically found that even in a pre-packed commodity, the provisions of the Act will apply.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that the question as to whether the offence under Section 36 of the Act would lie or not has been considered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Crl.M.C. No.6297 of 2015 [ P.K. Vaidyars Vaidhya Ratna Prabha Vaidyasala Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Kerala]. She further pointed out that, on considering the provisions of the Act, it was ordered by this Court that the offence under Section 36 of the Act can be attracted only in a case where, the commodity inside the package is not in conformity with the label declaration. Hence it is pointed out that an opportunity is granted by the authority themselves under Ext.P3 notice to compound the offence under Section 36(1) of the Act and therefore prayed that this Writ Petition be closed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the benefit of compounding as provided under Ext.P3 notice.
7. After considering the submissions made across the Bar, W.P.(C) No.30169 of 2014 6 this Court deems it appropriate to close this Writ Petition without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the respondents with appropriate application for compounding of the offences under the provisions of the Legal Metrology Rules, if permissible under law.
Writ Petition is closed accordingly.
Sd/-
EASWARAN S. JUDGE NS W.P.(C) No.30169 of 2014 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30169/2014 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PACKING AND TRANSPORTATION OF PETITIONERS PRODUCTS. EXT.P2 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 4-9-2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.P3 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. 191/2014 DATED 4-9-2014 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P4 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SEIZURE RECEIPT DATED 4-9- 2014 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXT.P5 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 17-9-2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.P6 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COURIER DETAILS PERTAINING TO EXT.P5.
EXT.P7 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPLY DT. 17-9-2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXT.P8 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COURIER DETAILS PERTAINING TO EXT.P7.
EXT.P9 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 26-11-11 OF THE APEX COURT IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1117 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES.