Bombay High Court Quashes Show Cause Notice in Essential Commodities Act Case — Collector Lacked Jurisdiction Under Section 6A After Goods Released. Show cause notice for confiscation set aside as Collector had no authority to initiate proceedings under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 after essential commodities were already released.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 62
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Shalimar Transport and Carting Contractor, through its proprietor Shaikh Hameed, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad challenging a show cause notice dated 10.9.2014 issued by the Collector, Parbhani (respondent no.3). The notice directed the petitioner to execute a bond for release of essential commodities seized under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The petitioner contended that the Collector had no jurisdiction to issue such a notice under Section 6A of the Act after the goods had already been released. The court examined the provisions of Section 6A and noted that the power to confiscate arises only when goods are seized and not released. Since the goods were already released, the Collector lacked jurisdiction. The court quashed the show cause notice and allowed the petition. The judgment was delivered by a division bench comprising B.P. Dharmadhikari and A.M. Badar JJ., with the opinion authored by A.M. Badar J. The court also made the rule absolute and directed the respondents to refund any amount deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the notice.

Headnote

A) Essential Commodities Act - Jurisdiction - Section 6A - Show Cause Notice - The Collector issued a show cause notice under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for confiscation of essential commodities. However, the goods had already been released. The court held that the Collector lacked jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 6A after the goods were released, as the power under Section 6A is exercisable only when the goods are seized and not released. The show cause notice was quashed. (Paras 1-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Collector, Parbhani had jurisdiction to issue a show cause notice under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for confiscation of essential commodities after the goods had already been released.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is allowed. The show cause notice dated 10.9.2014 issued by the Collector, Parbhani is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute. Respondents are directed to refund any amount deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the notice.

Law Points

  • Jurisdiction of Collector under Section 6A of Essential Commodities Act
  • 1955
  • Show cause notice without authority
  • Quashing of notice for lack of jurisdiction
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2014 LawText (BOM) (12) 19

Writ Petition No.8375/2014

2014-12-12

B.P. Dharmadhikari, A.M. Badar

Miss.Pradnya Talekar h/f Shri S.B. Talekar, Advocate for petitioner; Shri K.M. Suryawanshi, AGP for the Respondent nos.1 to 4

Shalimar Transport and Carting Contractor, through its Proprietor, Shaikh Hameed s/o Shaikh Rahim

The State of Maharashtra, through its Principal Secretary, Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Mumbai; The Divisional Commissioner, Office of the Divisional Commissioner, Delhi Gate, Aurangabad; The Collector, Collector Office, Parbhani; The District Supply Officer, Collector Office, Parbhani

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging show cause notice issued under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

Remedy Sought

Quashing and setting aside the show cause notice dated 10.9.2014 issued by the Collector, Parbhani.

Filing Reason

The petitioner firm was issued a show cause notice by the Collector directing execution of a bond for release of essential commodities, which the petitioner contended was without jurisdiction as the goods were already released.

Issues

Whether the Collector had jurisdiction to issue show cause notice under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 after the goods were already released.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the Collector lacked jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice under Section 6A as the goods had already been released. Respondents argued in support of the notice.

Ratio Decidendi

The power under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 to confiscate essential commodities is exercisable only when the goods are seized and not released. Once the goods are released, the Collector loses jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 6A.

Judgment Excerpts

By the instant petition, the petitioner firm is praying for quashing and setting aside the show cause notice dated 10.9.2014, issued by the respondent no.3 Collector, Parbhani, directing him to execute the bond for release of essential commodities. The court held that the Collector lacked jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 after the goods were already released.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad challenging a show cause notice dated 10.9.2014 issued by the Collector, Parbhani. The court heard the matter and reserved judgment on 03.12.2014, pronouncing it on 12.12.2014.

Acts & Sections

  • Essential Commodities Act, 1955: Section 6A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Show Cause Notice in Essential Commodities Act Case — Collector Lacked Jurisdiction Under Section 6A After Goods Released. Show cause notice for confiscation set aside as Collector had no authority to initiate proceedings ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Minister's Revision Order in Cooperative Loan Recovery Dispute — Guarantor's Liability Upheld Under Section 101 of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. Minister's order set aside for exceeding revisional jurisdicti...