1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1142 OF 2009 1. Rasoya Proteins Ltd., having its registered office situated at Village Wanjari, Taluka Wani, District Yavatmal, through its authorized signatory Rajendra S/o Maheshchandra Sankhala, Age 46 years, R/o House No.36, Durga, Layout No.2, Manishnagar, Nagpur working as Marketing Manager, Rasoya Proteins Ltd. 2. Gulabkhan Syed Ali Age 28 years, Occu.Service, Rasoya Proteins Ltd., R/o Santoshi Mata Road, Jalna .. PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Civil and Food Supplies, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. Additional Collector, Jalna 3. The Tahsildar, Jalna .. RESPONDENTS Shri N.S.Deshpande, Advocate for petitioners Shri K.S.Patil, Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondents CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ DATE : 3rd February 2010 2 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. This petition impugns the orders passed by the respondent No.2 and confirmed by the appellate authority, in respect of confiscation of a huge stock of 15,093 liters of Soyabin oil. The aforesaid confiscation proceedings were commenced on the basis of an inspection which was carried out by the respondents- authorities on 17.8.2009, in accordance with the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act and particularly Section 6-B. A show cause notice under Section 6-B of the Essential Commodities Act came to be issued to the petitioners on 27.8.2009. On 7.9.2009 the petitioners tendered their reply and immediately on the next day i.e. on 8.9.2009 the impugned order of confiscation of the Soyabin oil stock came to be passed. The petitioners being thus aggrieved by the impugned order filed Criminal Appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge-2, Jalna which came to be dismissed by the order dated 26.11.2009. 3. The principal contention which is advanced before us by the learned Counsel for the petitioners and which contention had 3 been reiterated before the appellate authority was that no hearing had taken place on 8.9.2009, yet the order sheets of the respondent – authorities were made to disclose that hearing had been given to the petitioners. The appellate authority found that the provisions of Section 6-B had been complied with and every reasonable opportunity as is contemplated in the law had been afforded to the petitioners. 4. At this juncture, we may usefully refer to the provisions of Section 6-B of the Essential Commodities Act which read as under. 6-B. Issue of show-cause notice before confiscation of essential commodity – [(1)] No order confiscating [essential commodity, package, covering, receptacle, animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance] shall be made under Section 6-A unless the owner of such [essential commodity, package, covering, receptacle, animal, vehicle, vessel or other person from whom [ it is seized] - (a) is given a notice in writing informing him of the grounds on which it is proposed to confiscate the [essential commodity, package, covering, receptacle, animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance]; 4 (b) is given an opportunity of making a representation in writing within such reasonable time as may be specified in the notice against the grounds of confiscation; and (c) is given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter. [(2) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub- section (1), no order confiscating any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance shall be made under Section 6-A if the owner of the animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance proves to the satisfaction of the Collector that it was used in carrying the essential commodity without the knowledge or connivance of the owner himself, his agent, if any, and the person in charge of the animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance and that each of them had taken all reasonable and necessary precautions against such use.] [(3) No order confiscating any essential commodity, package, covering, receptacle, animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance shall be invalid merely by reason of any defect or irregularity in the notice given under clause (a) of sub-section (1), if, in giving such notice, the provisions of that clause have been substantially complied with.] Perusal of the aforesaid provision discloses that twin safeguards are contemplated under Section 6-B of the Essential 5 Commodities Act. The first safeguard is that no action could be precipitated without issuance of a notice and second is that of reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter is to be afforded by the authorities-respondents. 5. The respondents have filed their affidavit-in-reply and in the affidavit-in-reply it is urged before us by the respondents that the principles of natural justice have been observed and followed and there is no breach. The impugned order recites that the petitioners had been heard before the impugned order came to be passed. Before the appellate authority as well as before this Court it is urged by the petitioners that the petitioners were not heard on 7th when they had tendered their reply but the order sheets of the authorities have been doctored to indicate that hearing was given to the petitioners. 6. On perusal of Section 6-B of the Essential Commodities Act it is disclosed that reasonable opportunity of hearing ought to be given. Without entering into a highly debatable issue as to whether the hearing was given to the petitioners or the respondents had manipulated their order sheets to show that hearing was given, according to us the interest of justice would be sub-served by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. 6 7. In that light of the matter, therefore, we are inclined to allow this petition and accordingly allow this petition, quash and set aside the impugned order and direct the respondents to afford the opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners shall accordingly appear before the Additional Collector, Jalna on 9th February 2010. The respondent – Additional Collector, Jalna shall afford opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and thereafter pass orders, in accordance with law. 8. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no orders as to costs. ( SHRIHARI P.DAVARE ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/criwp1142.09)