IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1743 of 1993 SHAMBHU SHARAN SINGH S/O SHRI JAMUNA PRASAD SINGH, R/O VILL. BARAHI JAGDISH, P.S. PIPRARHI, DIST.SITAMARHI. ------- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM-COLLECTOR, SITAMARHI, 3. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, DUMKA. ------ RESPONDENTS ----------- 03 02.12.2008 480 bags of urea was seized based on an inspection carried out on 02.01.1993 by the Block Development Officer. The reason for such seizure was storage of the fertilizers in question at a place not identified in the place as described under the License contained in annexure-1. Storage of urea at an unauthorized place was considered not only breach of the license but also the fertilizer control order. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on a decision rendered in the case of Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Versus State of Bihar and others 1990, PLJR page 416 for the proposition that mere notification authorizing a person to act as a Fertilizer Inspector in accordance with rule 27 may not be enough if a gazette notification in this regard is not made either by the State Government or the Central Government. In a similar dispute raised in the case of Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal ( Supra) the court had taken notice that no notification in the gazette had taken place after April 1989. Despite several indulgence granted to the State counsel the concerned notification could not be produced and therefore the designated authority held not to have the powers despite a 2 notification having been made as such it is nothing to indicate that this position has been altered thereafter, since no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State. The writ application is allowed on the ratio of the case rendered in the case of Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal. The impugned orders contained in annexure 3 and 4 are hereby quashed. Sym ( A.K.Tripathi,J.)