THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21448 of 2006 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in conducting raids and seizure of LPG cylinders from the campuses and branches of the petitioner society on the ground that it is not entitled to use domestic cylinders contrary to the directions and instructions issued by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, direct the respondents not to prevent the petitioner and its branches from using LPG cylinders of domestic category at subsidized rates. The petitioner is described as an educational committee representing by its Manager, by name, Sri B.I.Sekhar Rao. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has produced before this Court a copy of the certificate of registration of societies, which shows that the petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act XXI of 1860. Except the petitioner, which is a society, no other institution is figured as party in this writ petition. One of the petitioner’s institutions, by name, Sri Chaitanya Mahila College (Saraswathi Buildings), Main Campus at Tadigadapa, was inspected by the Civil Supplies Department on 04.10.2006 and found 20 gas cylinders, which are used for commercial purpose, and 6 domestic category cylinders, during such inspection. On the ground that 6 domestic category cylinders were used in the college, the seizure of the same was effected by conducting a panchanama. In this writ petition, mainly, it is the case of the petitioner that it is running various campuses and institutions in several parts of the State and that the cylinders are being used for the purpose of students as such as per the instructions issued by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, it is entitled to use the cylinders of domestic category. Alleging that such seizure is effected contrary to the instructions issued by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, this writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly relies on letter, dated 13.04.1987 addressed by the Government of India, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, New Delhi, to Indian Oil Corporation, Bombay and Assam Divisions; Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Bombay and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Bombay. A perusal of the aforesaid letter indicates that a clarification is issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, New Delhi, with regard to supply of LPG (packed) to certain categories stating that supplies to all schools and colleges for the purpose of midday meal schemes be treated as for domestic use for the purpose of deposit as well as price. Respondent No.3 – District Civil Supply Officer, Krishna District at Machilipatnam, has filed a counter-affidavit on behalf respondents 1, 2 and 4. In the said counter-affidavit, while denying various allegations of the petitioner, it is stated that as per clause 3(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Petroleum Products (Licensing and Regulation of Supplies) Order, 1980, any person, who stores more than 7 LPG cylinders of 14.2 kgs each, has to obtain license from the licensing authority. It is further stated that the petitioner has not obtained license or permission from the licensing authority and there is also exemption in this regard to the State and Central Government Departments and their undertakings. It is further stated that the petitioner is running a private unaided college and it is not covered under midday meal scheme, as such, it is not entitled to use LPG domestic cylinders under subsidized category. It is further stated that the Government has strictly prohibited the use of LPG domestic cylinders for non-domestic purposes and the petitioner is running the institutions on commercial lines i.e. by collecting fee from the students for boarding and lodging. It is further stated that the petitioner has been utilizing LPG domestic cylinders for commercial purpose, though it was in possession of certain cylinders of commercial purpose and has not produced proof of frequency of utilization of commercial cylinders, at the time of inspection to the inspecting staff, as such, it is clearly established that the petitioner is utilizing domestic LPG cylinders under subsidized rates under the cover of few commercial cylinders kept on the spot for the purpose of inspection. It is also stated that using domestic LPG cylinders in private hostels would defeat the very purpose of using gas at subsidized rates by the domestic section. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. Though the petitioner seeks directions to the respondents not to raid and seize its campuses and institutions, neither any hostel nor any institution run by it is before this Court. No particulars of the institutions and the campuses run by the petitioner are given in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition or placed any other material before this Court. In the absence of particulars of such institutions and hostels run by the petitioner, no direction can be issued as prayed for by it in this writ petition. Though the prayer portion of the Writ Petition refers to the expression ‘petitioner institutions’, the petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act XXI of 1860, but not an institution. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is entitled to use the cylinders, which are meant for domestic use, it is not clear from the instructions issued by the respondents that whether they apply to the private institutions, which are being run on commercial lines. Neither the Government of India nor any of the Corporations is a party to this writ petition. In any event, in view of the provisions of the aforesaid Control Order, unless one possesses license, he cannot store more than 7 cylinders at a time. In the absence of any exemption to the petitioner, license from the licensing authority and valid explanation for not complying such statutory obligations, this Court cannot issue directions to the respondents not to either raid or make inspection in its premises. The very relief sought in the Writ Petition itself is vague and lacks particulars for grant of directions as prayed for. In the absence of petitioner making governmental authorities, oil corporations and institutions run by it as parties before this Court and giving particulars and places of the institutions run by it, merely referring to the instructions, which are stated to have been issued by the Oil Companies, no directions can be issued as prayed for. In that view of the matter, I do not find any ground to issue directions as prayed for. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) deposited by the petitioner pursuant to interim order, dated 16.10.2006, will be subject to final orders to be passed by the competent authority under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 11th OCTOBER, 2011. kvni