Gujarat High Court
Sundhaji Trading Company Through ... vs State Of Gujarat on 4 March, 2022
Author: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati
Bench: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati
C/SCA/7130/2021 ORDER DATED: 04/03/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7130 of 2021
=====================================================
SUNDHAJI TRADING COMPANY THROUGH PARTNER
SUNILKUMAR LALITBHAI THAKKAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=====================================================
Appearance:
TATVDEEP J JANI(7227) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
VIRAL K SHAH(5210) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR. ISHAN JOSHI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1, 2
=====================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
Date : 04/03/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Viral K. Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the writ-applicant and Mr. Ishan Joshi, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents - State authorities.
2. Mr. Viral K. Shah, the learned counsel has aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the respondent authority dated 03.12.2020. The relevant para of the said order dated 03.12.2020 read thus:
Page 1 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 12:10:59 IST 2022
C/SCA/7130/2021 ORDER DATED: 04/03/2022 "Thus, considering the application submitted by the Mamlatdar, Vadgam and the explanation in writing produced for the appellant, the appellants have not obtained any prior approval as per the notification dated 30/04/2019 of the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas of the Government of India for operating the said pump and could not give any satisfactory explanation or produce proper record or purchase bills or bill-book for the sale with respect to the stored stock before the inspection team at the time of inspection. They have not produced the stock-statement required to be maintained for available and daily stock. Further, the report of analysis of the samples collected by the Mamlatdar, Vadgam from the said petrol pump has been sent to this office by the office of the Deputy Director of the Food and Civil Supplies through a report dated 09/10/2020. As per the analysis report, the sample collected from Shri Sundhaji Trading Co. is not found to be as per the standards and thus, it is found that, the operators of the said pump were selling any other adulterated petroleum substance for transportation purpose in the name of biodiesel. In this way, the operators of the biodiesel pump - Shri Sundhaji Trading Co. have not maintained proper account records required to be maintained by vendors of petroleum substance and it transpires that they were selling other adulterated petroleum substance in the name of biodiesel. Hence, on the basis of the above discussion, the following order appears justifibale.
:: O R D E R ::
As it is clear that Shri Sundhaji trading Co., at - Bharkawada, Ta. Vadgam was selling other adulterated petroleum substance in the name of biodiesel in unauthorized way, I, Anand Patel, Collector, Banaskantha, by virtue of power conferred under The Essential Commodities Act, 1955, hereby order to confiscate 100% quantity, i.e. 31885 litre of the quantity worth Rs.18,50,287/- of the 31885 litre of the quantity worth Rs.18,50,287/- seized by the Mamlatdar, Vadgam during inspection of Shri Sundhaji Trading Co. and the amount be deposited under Major Head - 0408 - Food Storage and Warehousing, Minor Head - 800 - Other Receipts, of the Government and a copy of the challan be submitted Page 2 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 12:10:59 IST 2022 C/SCA/7130/2021 ORDER DATED: 04/03/2022 to the Mamlatdar, Vadgam and this office.
Further, the operators of Shri Sundhaji Trading Co. shall maintain status quo for the quantity seized until further order for final disposal of the confiscated quantity is passed by this office.
Pronounce today on 3rd day of December, 2020 under my signature and the office seal.
Sd/- (Illegible) Collector, Banaskantha"
3. By way of the present writ-application, the writ-
applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:
"(A). This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari and / or writ of mandamus and / or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside order dated 03.12.2020.
(B). Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the execution and operation of order impugned dated 03.12.2020.
(C). Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, direct the Respondent No.2 to release the stock confiscated by the same pursuant to the order impugned.
(D). Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant ex-pare ad-interim relief in terms of Para- 9 (B) and (C).
(E). Any other and further relief/s deem fit, just and proper may kindly be granted by this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice."Page 3 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 12:10:59 IST 2022
C/SCA/7130/2021 ORDER DATED: 04/03/2022
4. Mr. Viral Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the writ-applicant submitted that the writ-applicant is running a bio- diesel pump at the address mentioned in the cause-title of the present writ-application. The writ-applicant is in possession of all the relevant documents for running the bio-diesel pump including the lease deed of land, relevant licenses and invoice for purchase of the stock of bio-diesel. Mr. Shah, the learned counsel submitted that on 08.09.2020, the stock of 31.885 liters of bio-diesel of the writ-applicant being traded at its pump and was seized by the Mamlatdar exercising powers under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Pursuant to the said seizure, a show cause notice dated 22.09.2020 came to be issued to the writ-applicant and the writ- applicant was called upon to submit before the respondent no.2 justifications as regards the allegations raised in the show cause notice.
5. Mr. Viral Shah, the learned counsel submitted that the writ-applicant filed his response alongwith the evidences in support of his trade, duly produced at Annexure-D in the month of October, 2022. There were two replies filed by the writ-applicant in October, 2022. Mr. Viral Shah, the learned counsel submitted that the said replies filed by the writ-applicant as stated above have not been Page 4 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 12:10:59 IST 2022 C/SCA/7130/2021 ORDER DATED: 04/03/2022 considered by the respondent authorities and mechanically passed the impugned order dated 03.12.2020.
6. Mr. Shah, the learned counsel also submitted that the report dated 09.10.2020 relied on by the respondent no.1 for adjudication of the show cause notice, since the same is not supplied to the writ-applicant, the same adversely affects the rights of the writ-applicant and the same is bad in law.
7. Mr. Ishan Joshi, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent State authorities, under instructions, he could not contradict the fact that the said report dated 09.10.2020 was not supplied to the writ-applicant before passing the impugned order.
8. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, without going into the merits of the matter, admittedly the report dated 09.10.2020, based on which the impugned order dated 03.12.2020 is passed, is without giving the same to the writ-applicant. The impugned order is also passed without considering the replies filed by the writ-applicant to the show cause notice in October, 2020. It appears that the impugned order passed by the respondent authorities is passed without sharing Page 5 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 12:10:59 IST 2022 C/SCA/7130/2021 ORDER DATED: 04/03/2022 the report dated 09.10.2020 with the writ-applicant and the replies filed by the writ-applicant alongwith the documents were not taken into consideration. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the present writ-application, the impugned order dated 03.12.2020 is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the concerned respondent authority for adjudication, at the stage where the writ-applicant was not given the copy of the report dated 09.10.2020 and it is directed that the writ-applicant be given an opportunity to respond to the said report and make his submission and it is further directed that the replies filed by the writ-applicant be taken into consideration, while deciding the matter. It is however directed that the concerned respondent authority shall decide the same in accordance with the provisions of law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of the order.
9. With the above directions, the present writ-application stands disposed of. Direct service is permitted.
(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J) Pradhyuman Page 6 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 12:10:59 IST 2022