IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 872 of 2008. M/s Lalta Prasad Ram Narayan, Ramnagar. … Petitioner. Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. …Respondents. Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. K.C.Tiwari, Brief Holder, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. V.K.Kohli, Senior Advocate, with Mr. I.P.Kohli, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent no.4- Indial Oil Corporation. Date November 23, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Delay Condonation Application No. 9719 of 2010) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Delay in filing the counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent no.3 is condoned. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.3 is taken on record. Delay condonation application stands disposed of. Learned counsel for the respondents have agreed that this writ petition may be disposed of finally today itself. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 17- 5-2008 and 21-5-2008 passed by respondent no.4 and 3 respectively. Further prayer for issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interrupt in the business activity of the petitioner pertaining to sale of kerosene oil as whole sale dealer has been made. On 23-5-2008, this Court has passed an interim order to the following effect:- “Prima facie by a perusal of the inspection report dated 14-5-2008 (Annexure No.3), it is clear that the deficiency of kerosene oil is within the permissible limit of 4% under the Government Order. It is a fit case for grant of interim order. In view of the inspection made on 14-5-2008 by a team of five members and the report (Annexure No.3 to the writ petition), the operation of the order dated 17-5-2008 passed by the respondent no.4 2 and order dated 21-5-2008 passed by the respondent no.3 impugned in this petition shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.” I have perused the affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.3. In paragraph no. 3(D) the following averment inter alia has been made:- “That it is relevant to submit that on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged against the petitioner a criminal case no. 114 of 2008 U/s 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act namely, State Versus Rishi Kumar and others was filed and the concerned learned C.J.M. Nainital vide order dated 05/11/2008 has accepted the final report and the record of the case has been directed to be consigned to the Record Room.” The respondent no. 3 has annexed the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Nainital as Annexure CA-1 to the counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that on 2-12-2008, the proceeding initiated against the petitioner under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act was also dropped in view of the order dated 5-11-2008 passed by the C.J.M. Nainital in Misc. Criminal Case No. 114 of 2008 State Vs. Rishi Kumar and others under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, P.S. Ramnagar. In view of the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Nainital accepting the final report in Criminal Case No. 114 of 2008 under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, P.S. Ramnagar as well as the order dated 2-12-2008 passed by the District Magistrate, Nainital, referred to in connected WPMS No. 870 of 2008, the writ petition is liable to be allowed and the impugned order dated 17-5-2008 passed by the respondent no.4-Indian Oil Corporation Limited thereby stopping supply of kerosene oil to the petitioner and order dated 21-5-2008 passed by respondent no.3-District Supply Officer Nainital (Annexure No. 5 and 6 respectively to the petition) are hereby quashed. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP