CW-4528/2006-Ganga Ram Suyal Vs. State & Ors. : Order dt.24.03.2008 1/4 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4528/2006 Ganga Ram Suyal Vs. State of Raj.& Ors. Date : 24.03.2008 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. Rajesh Shah for the petitioner. Mr. K.L. Thakur, Addl. Advocate General. --------- 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner inter alia seeking relief against the respondent authorities not to interfere with the business of the petitioner who has been given licence under Solvent, Raffinate and Slop (Acquisition, Sale, Storage and Prevention of use in Automobiles) Order, 2000 framed under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 under which the petitioner was given a licence. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities are unnecessarily and unduly interfering with the business of the petitioner. This Court by order dated 3.1.2007 passed the following order upon the said writ petition which is reproduced as under as under:- “Heard learned counsel for the parties on the stay application. The following order is passed:- 1. The petitioner shall dispatch the product which it CW-4528/2006-Ganga Ram Suyal Vs. State & Ors. : Order dt.24.03.2008 2/4 is licensed to manufacture, to the consumers list whereof shall be made available to the respondent No.7. 2. The goods shall be dispatched to the respective consumers in specified packings of 200 ltrs. 3. Each such packing shall bear such seal as may be specified by respondent No.7, and such goods should reach the destination with the seals intact. 4. For the purpose of ensuring the goods to have reached the destination with seals intact, the petitioner shall obtain certificate in that regard from the consumers and at the same time necessary transit passes shall also be collected from the various check posts falling en- route. Record in this regard shall be maintained by the D.S.O. Respondent No.7 to be made available to the Court as and when required. If the petitioner abides by the above conditions, the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioner without obtaining FSL report and are also restrained from interfering with the business of the petitioner without obtaining FSL report. Sd- ( N.P. GUPTA ), J.” 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the condition imposed by this Court vide condition No.2 in the aforesaid order that the goods shall be dispatched to the respective consumers CW-4528/2006-Ganga Ram Suyal Vs. State & Ors. : Order dt.24.03.2008 3/4 in specified packings of 200 ltrs is causing serious prejudice to the petitioner as the petitioner receives bulk orders and the quantity can be supplied to specific consumers only in tankers in which such solvent petrolling products can be sold by the petitioner in terms of his licence. On the side opposite, Mr. K.L. Thakur, Addl. Advocate General submits that on certain occasions it was found from various dealers that the petitioner sold smaller quantities to such dealers and indulged in black marketing of the said product and certain FIRs were also lodged against him on which after investigation necessary challans have been filed in the Courts and they are subject matter of trial by the competent courts. 3. Having heard learned counsels, this Court find that as a matter of fact though the petitioner could not be restricted as such to sell the goods in question in the packings of 200 ltrs only because prima facie there appears no statutory basis for the same according to the said Order 2000, however, it appears that this Court has imposed this condition to put a sort of restraint on the petitioner to prevent black marketing. 4. This petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the aforesaid quoted interim order except condition No.2. However, it is needless to add that if anything wrong is found to have been CW-4528/2006-Ganga Ram Suyal Vs. State & Ors. : Order dt.24.03.2008 4/4 committed by the petitioner, the authorities concerned under the aforesaid Order 2000 would be free to take action in accordance with law against the petitioner as even otherwise there is no restraint upon the respondents in the aforesaid interim order. 5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of as indicated above. No order as to costs. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.13 babulal/-