Judgment · High Court

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BP KATAKEY Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner, by the present petition, has prayed for a direction to the respo ndent authorities to release the oil tanker bearing registered No. AS-07/A-1282. According to the petitioner the said vehicle was seized by the Inspector of Foo d and Civil Supplies and Consumer affairs of Kamrup (Metro) on 9.6.2009 for viol ation of Clause 6(4)(i) of PDS (Control) Order, 2001 and Clause 3(2) of Kerosene (Restriction on use and fixation of ceiling price) Order. It is also the case of the petitioner that though a confiscation proceeding has been initiated by the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) by issuing a show caus e notice dated 6.4.2010 under Section 6(B) of the Essential Commodities Act, 195 5 and the petitioner submitted his show cause reply on 26.4.2010, the said proce eding has neither been finalized till date nor any order for release of the vehi cle in custody of the petitioner has been passed.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is read y to pay the fine in the event the vehicle is confiscated under the provision of the Act and the vehicle, thereafter, may directed to be released in favour of t he petitioner. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) it has been admitted that though the confiscation proceeding has been initiated the same has not been finalized as yet as the two other persons i.e. the driver of the vehicle and proprietor of M/s Rupam Petroleum Products Company, Dadhara, Tezpur has not filed their reply to the show cause notice which are still awaite d. The fact remains that the confiscation proceeding has been initiated on 6.4.2010 by the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup, (Metro). The said proceeding having been in itiated must reach its logical conclusion within a reasonable time. It appears that the proceeding has been delayed for non submission of the show c ause reply of the two other persons.

The authority having initiated such proceed ing has to finalized the said proceeding and pass necessary order within a reaso nable period of time. Since the proceeding has been initiated on 6.4.2010 which is still pending, I di spose of the writ petition with the direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) to decide the proceeding within 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order passed today. It is needless to say that in case the order for confiscation of the vehicle of the petitioner is passed and the petitioner files an application for payment of fine in terms of the second proviso to sub Section 1 of Section 6(A), it shall a lso be considered and necessary order shall be passed thereon. The writ petitioner is accordingly disposed of. No cost.