IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30675 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- A.SULFIKAR,S/O.ABDUL KAREEM, VAZHATHOPPIL HOUSE,KAZHUTHURUTHY POST, ARYANKAVU,PUNALUR,KOLLAM DISTRICT (PROPRIETOR,ANSHAD PROVISION STORE,KAZHTHURUTHY) BY ADV. SRI.T.M.RAMAN KARTHA SRI.ARUN BASIL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SUPPLIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -1. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM 691 001. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL) KOTTARAKKARA 691 506. 4. DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, KOLLAM 691 001. 5. TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, PATHANAPURAM 689 695. 6. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,THENMALA, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 308. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED SHAH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.30675/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1. A TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE ARYANKAVU GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 27.6.2011. EXHIBIT P2. A TRUE COPY OF THE SHOP INSPECTION REPORT DATED 19.10.2011. EXHIBIT P3. A TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.130/11(W)PPM ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4. A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX INVOICE DATED 17.10.2011. EXHIBIT P5. A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX INVOICE DATED 20.10.2011. EXHIBIT P6. A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX INVOICE DATED 24.10.2011. EXHIBIT P7. A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 2.11.2011. EXHIBIT P8. A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 15.11.2011. EXHIBIT P9. A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 8.11.2011. EXHIBIT P10. A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION BEFORE THE CHIEF SECRETARY DATED 2.11.2011. EXHIBIT P11. A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION BEFORE THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE DATED 2.11.2011. EXHIBIT P12. A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATIONS BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 3.11.2011. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 30675 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 17th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T According to the petitioner, he is the owner of a provision store by name “Anshad Provision Store” at Kazhuthurutty in Aryankavu Panchayat. He is also a dealer in rice and has obtained necessary licences. It is stated that he sold 13,500 kgs of rice to M/s.A.V.Traders, Kalady by invoice dated 24/10/11 and the same was being loaded into truck bearing Regn.No.KL-01 S- 7926. While so, the 6th respondent detained the vehicle with 25 bags of rice and removed the truck with the materials to the police station. He has also locked up the petitioner's godown and that including the balance of 180 bags sold, 325 bags are detained. Petitioner says that such proceedings initiated against him under the Essential commodities Act on the allegation that the rice is FCI rice meant for public distribution is erroneous, and therefore, should be ordered to be released to him. He also seeks an order for the release of the truck in question. 2. Petitioner relies on Ext.P9, a report made by the Taluk Supply Officer, Pathanapuram to the 6th respondent after WPC No. 30675/11 :2 : inspecting the 25 bags of rice, which is now stored in the Police Station. According to the petitioner, this report proves that the rice in question is not from FCI godown and that the same is an open market commodity. 3. However, a reading of Ext.P9 itself show that the opinion formed by the Taluk Supply Officer is only a prima facie opinion and that he himself has suggested that expert inspection is necessary. Therefore, no final conclusion can be arrived at on the basis of the findings in Ext.P9. 4. Be that as it may, now that proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner under the Essential Commodities Act, before any further steps are taken concerning the stock in question, which are stated to be kept at the Police Station and in the godown, it is necessary that the respondents should ensure that the rice in question is liable to be proceeded against under the Essential Commodities Act. This I say so for the reason that if it were not so, huge loss will be caused to the petitioner, particularly having regard to the quantity involved. 5. Therefore, I direct that, on the production of a copy of this judgment, the 2nd respondent will issue appropriate orders WPC No. 30675/11 :3 : directing respondents 4 and 5 to verify the rice in question either by themselves or by any other expert, to ensure that the rice in question is liable to be proceeded against under the Essential Commodities Act. It is also directed that, in the event the report is in favour of the petitioner, appropriate orders in the matter should be passed. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible. 6. Yet another aspect of the matter is regarding the continued detention of the lorry bearing Regn.No.KL-01 S 7926. According to the petitioner, this lorry is under detention since 24/10/11. Nobody will be benefitted if the vehicle is kept under detention exposing it to sun and rain. Therefore, I direct that, along with a copy of this judgment and the writ petition, it will be open to the petitioner to make an application to the 2nd respondent for interim custody of the vehicle, in which event, the 2nd respondent will pass appropriate orders in the matter immediately. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp //True Copy// PA to Judge