Raj Kumar Mondal vs State of West Bengal

Amitabha Dutta, J.—This Revisional application in which besides Section 481 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the interference of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been invoked is directed against an order dated 30.11.82 passed by the Collector, Chandernagore directing a sale of 8310 liters of Kerosone oil seized in connection with Sinqoor Police Station Case No. 20 dated 26.12.79 u/s 7(1) (a) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 arising out of E. C. Act Seizure case No. 7 of 1980. The Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the seizure of Kerosene oil in question has been made for shortage of 52 litres of Kerosene oil as per book balance and failure on the part of the petitioner to produce document showing that the Kerosene oil in question was supplied by the Indian Oil Corporation to the petitioner under M. P. D. C. scheme But it is pointed out on behalf of the petitioner that the Annexure "A" to the petition would show Government order allowing shortage of one percent to two percent for transaction of purchase and sale of Kerosene oil, and Annexure "B" to the petition would show that the Kerosene oil in question was supplied to the petitioner by I.O.C. under M.P.D.C. Scheme. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order does not show that the petitioner has contravened any order made u/s 3 of the Essential Commodities Act.

On the other hand, it is submitted by the Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State that the present application is a mala fide attempt to circumvent the provisions of law under which the State Government is the Appellate authority in respect of any order made by the Collector u/s 6A of the Act and that as the petitioner has not availed of the alternative remedy of preferring any appeal before the State Government from the order of the Collector, the present application should not be entertained by this Court.

After hearing the submissions of the Learned Advocates for the parties and going through the impugned order itself, I find that the order of the Collector suffers from the vice of lack of jurisdiction on his part and as he can proceed u/s 6A of the Act after being satisfied prima facie that the person concerned has violated an, order made u/s 3 of the Essential Commodities Act. In the present case, nowhere in the impugned order has the Collector recorded his prima facie satisfaction regarding violation of any order made u/s 3 of the said Act by the petitioner and therefore, in my view, the impugned order is wholly without jurisdiction. No doubt, this Court will not ordinarily interfere under Article 227 of the Constitution where the petitioner has an alternative remedy equally speedy and efficacious and he has not availed of it. But the rule of alternative remedy does not oust the jurisdiction of the High Court to interfere in special circumstances or in extraordinary cases, where the order of administrative authority under challenge is on the face of it without jurisdiction and the aggrieved person has no speedier remedy except by moving this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. In my view, the present case falls in that category where the interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution is called for. In the result, the Revisional application succeeds. The impugned order of the Learned Collector is quashed. The seized Kerosene Oil along with the containers will be returned to the petitioner subject to any order that may be made in the Criminal Case if any pending against him.

Let a copy of the order be sent to the Collector, Chandernagore at the cost of the petitioner at the earliest.