1 Cri. W.P.1171.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1171 OF 2009 Dnyanoba Ganpat Khetmala ... Petitioner V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents ... Mr.Satyajit S.Bora,Advocate for petitioner Mr.D.R.Korde,A.P.P.for respondent No.1-State ... CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 8TH APRIL, 2010 ORAL ORDER: 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2] This Criminal Writ Petition is filed challenging the Judgment and order passed by the Additional Collector, Beed, dated 11th November, 2009, thereby directing the petitioner to pay penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- and to furnish surety of Rs.1,00,000/- for release of his vehicle, which came to be seized in August, 2009 by the police of of Ashti Police Station, District Beed. 3] It is case of the prosecution that, the 2 Cri. W.P.1171.09 petitioner's vehicle was being used for transporting an 'essential commodity' namely, kerosene, in violation of provisions of Essential Commodities Act. When the vehicle was intercepted, same was seized alongwith the kerosene. It appears from the record that, notice under section 6(B) of the Essential Commodities Act was not issued to the petitioner, but the petitioner suo-moto approached the Collector on 25th September, 2009 and sought return of the vehicle. The learned Additional Collector, while passing the impugned order, did not mention as to whether the notice under section 6(B) of the Act was issued and served on the petitioner. The learned Additional Collector, while passing the order imposed the term, which appears and is rather harsh. And he did not assign any reason for the same. For want of the notice under section 6(B) of Act, the entire proceeding was illegal and therefore impugned order deserves to be set aside. It is necessary that the Collector Beed should be directed to issue notice under section 6(B) of the Essential Commodities Act to the petitioner and thereafter decide the question as to on what terms the vehicle should be returned to the petitioner. i] The impugned order dated 11th November 2009 is set aside. ii] The case is remanded back to the Collector, Beed, who shall follow the 3 Cri. W.P.1171.09 legal procedure prescribed under section 6(A) of the Essential Commodities Act, for deciding the question as to on what terms the vehicle should be returned to the petitioner. iii] The Collector Beed is directed to dispose of the proceeding as far as possible within two months from this order. Rule is made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) MTK/ok