IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 23RD BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 26898 of 2010(J) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ HAJI A. SAFARUDEEN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.M.ABDUL RAHIMAN RAWTHER, THOPPIL PUTHEN VEEDU, PARAKODE P.O. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM-691001. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645. 4. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, KOLLAM-691001. 5. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645. 6. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, KOLLAM-691001. 7. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, ADOOR-681001. .....2/-... ...2... 8. THE DEPOT MANAGER, SUPPLYCO, KOLLAM-691001. 9. THE RATIONING INSPECTOR, KOLLAM-691001. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI. P. NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SVS/ ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 26898 of 2010 J ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 14th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Vide Ext.P5 mahazar dated 10-08-2010, 139 bags of raw rice belonging to the petitioner were seized by the respondents on the ground that the same was possessed by the petitioner, without a licence under the provisions of Kerala Food Grains Dealers Licensing Order, 1967. It is this proceedings which is sought to be challenged in this writ petition. 2. Going by the pleadings, although the petitioner applied for licence under the aforesaid order, licence was issued to the petitioner only on 18-08-2010. Therefore, the inevitable conclusion is at the time of seizure, namely on 10-08-2010, the petitioner did not have a licence under the aforesaid order. 3. The first contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the application for the licence having been made by him as early as on 24-05-2008, the licence issued ought to have effective from the date of application. Any licence issued, can be valid only from the date of its issue. There is no provision either in the order or in the Essential Commodities Act, mandating WPC.26898/10 : 2 : that licence issued on an application should be effective from the date of the application. If that be so, the contention now raised cannot be accepted. 4. It is contended that in view of the provisions contained in the Removal of (Licensing Requirements, Stock Limits and Movement Restriction) on Specified Food Stuffs Order, 2002, the requirement of the licence under the 1967 Order has been dispensed with. That contention is only to be rejected in view of the provisions contained in GO(MS) No.13674/D1/2009/F&CSD dated 08-12-2009, a copy of which has been produced by the learned Government Pleader. 5. It was then contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that at any rate, in view of the provisions under the 1967 Order, on seizure of the goods, the officer could have only stored the item safely and could not have disposed of the same as submitted by the learned Government Pleader. However, a reading of Section 6A(2) of the Essential Commodities Act shows that if the material seized is a perishable one, it is within the power of the respondents to dispose of the same, in the manner WPC.26898/10 : 3 : prescribed. Therefore, this contention also lacks merit. 6. In the aforesaid circumstances, the seizure of the goods as per Ext.P5 needs to be upheld and I do so. 7. Be that as it may, the learned Government Pleader points points out that the matter is now pending consideration before the second respondent. In that view of the matter, it is for the District Collector to complete the adjudication as contemplated under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act. This, the District Collector shall do in accordance with law and with notice to the petitioner, within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. 8. All other contentions of the petitioner on merits are left open. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. To Judge