IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 38256 of 2007(D) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------- 1. P.C.AUTO FUELS, DPC DEALER, ELAMKULAM, S.A.ROAD, COCHIN-20, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER. 2. K.P.VARGHESE & SONS, BPC DEALER, BANERJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM NORTH, COCHIN-18, REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 3. MAJESTIC FILLING STATION, BPC DEALER, LISSIE JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM-18, REP. BY ITS MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SRI.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE ASST. CONTROLLER OF LEGAL METROLOGY, KAKKANADU, KOCHI. 2. THE INSPECTOR (VSI-I), LEGAL METROLOGY, ERNAKULAM. BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/01/2008, ALONG WITH WP(C) NO. 38259/07, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.38256/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICTE OF VERIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE CERTIFICTE OF VERIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE CERTIFICTE OF VERIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 19/12/2007 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 19/12/2007 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 19/12/2007 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.12.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PEITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.12.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PEITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.12.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PEITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.10.05 IN WA NO.3666/2001 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P11: COPY OF the JUDGMENT DATED 7.12.2007 IN WPC NO.35792/07 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NOs. 38256 & 38259 OF 2007 D ========================== Dated this the 1st day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T In WP(C) No.38256/07, Exts. P4 to P6 memos have been issued suspending sales through the dispensing units mentioned therein. In so far as WP(C) No.38259/07 is concerned, the memo issued is Ext.P2. 2. Admittedly, in these cases, there have been short delivery of petroleum products. But none of these memos show that there has been any tampering of the seals on the dispensing units by the dealer concerned. If there is no tampering of the seals, I do not think that the restamping applied for by the petitioners could be delayed for any valid reason. Short delivery, by itself, may be an offence under the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 and the rules framed therein. For such violation, the respondents may be competent to lodge WPC 38256 & 38259/07 :2 : proceedings against the petitioners also. However, in the absence of allegation of tampering in Exts. P4 to P6 in WP(C) No.38256/07 and Ext.P2 in WP(C) No.38259/07, restamping if done at this stage is not going to cause any prejudice to the respondents in any action that may eventually take against the concerned dealers. 3. Although the learned Government Pleader has strongly objected the relief sought for by the petitioners, he too had to admit that there is no evidence of tampering of the seals. In such circumstances, I see no justification to delay restamping of the dispensing units involved in these writ petitions. Accordingly, writ petitions are disposed of directing that the respondents shall restamp the dispensing units in the petitioners outlets as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one week of production of a copy of this judgment. However, it is clarified that such restamping shall be without prejudice to the right of the respondents to take action that might be permissible against the petitioners. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. Rp