1. Apex Lubes and Fuels lndia Pvt. Ltd v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order declaring the initiation of 6-A proceedings and the orders passed by the respondent No. 2 in 6-4 Case No. A71154lCSl2O24, dated 09-01-2025, confiscating the distillate base oil of 12,000 liters and 29.920 Mts. and imposing penalty of Rs. '1,00,000/- on each tankers bearing No. TS 07 UM 9499, TS 09 UM 9899 and G3 12 BV 7082, even though the seized stock is not an essential commodity, comes under the purview of Telangana State Petroleum Products (Licensing and Regulation of Supplies) Order, 1980, as per the forensic lab report, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of natural justice, without any jurisdiction and also violative of Articles 14, '19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia. Consequently set aside the same, thereby direct the respondent No's. 2 to 4 authorities release the seized stock of distillate base oil of 12,000 liters and 29.920 Mts. and tankers bearing No. 13 07 UM 9499, TS 09 UM 9899 and al 12BV 7082. |.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the orders passed by the respondent No.2 in 6-4 Case No. A711541CS.12024, daled 09-01-2025, thereby direct the respondent No's. 2 to 4 authorities release the seized stock of distillate base oil of 12,000 liters and 29.920 Mts. and tankers bearing No, TS 07 UM 9499, TS 09 UM 9899 and GJ 12 BV 7082. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3 : GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : GP FOR HOME The Court made the following ORDER .tHE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE'I" MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NO.T822 OF 2025 ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the initiation of the proceedings under Section 6-,4 of the Essential Commodities Act and also the order d1.09.01 .2025 passed by the 2nd respondent in 6-,{ Case No.A7l154lCS/2024 confiscating the distillate base oil of 12,000 litres and 29.920 metric tonnes and imposing penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- on each of the tankers bearing No.TS 07 t M 9499, TS 09 LM 9899 and GJ 12 BV 7082, even though the seized stock is not an essential commodity and does not come under the purview of the Telangana State Petroleum Products (Licensing and Regulation of Supplies) Order, 1980, as illegal, arbitrary and as violative of principles of natural justice and without jurisdiction and consequently to set aside the same and to direct respondents No.2 to 4 authorities to release the seized stock of the distillate base oil along with the tankers and to pass such other order or orders. 2 W P.No.1822 of2025

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition are that the I't petitioner is a trader in purchase and sale of distillate base oil from different companies throughout India in tankers and sells the same I in wholesale to the retailers and the 2nd petitioner is the owner of the two tankers bearing Nos. TS 07 UM 9499 and TS 09 UM 9899. It is submitted that the I't petitioner was transporting the distillate base oil through the tankers belonging to the 2nd petitioner and the entire transactions are being done through bills and GST invoices for purchase and sale. It is stated that the 3'd respondent has filed a complaint before the 4'h respondent without veriffing the actual facts that the I "t petitioner is storing diesel in its business premises illegally and on the basis of such a complaint, FIR No.172 of 2024 was registered and the quantity of 12,000 litres of distillate base oil and also the vehicles belonging to the 2nd petitioner and one Mr. Kanji, were seized and thereafter, the proceedings under Section 6-,{ of the Essential Commodities Act were initiated and also concluded confiscating the seized stock and levying penalty on the seized vehicles. Chatlenging the same, the present Writ Petition is filed. 3 Leamed counsel for the petitioners submitted that distillate base oil is not an essential commodity and therefore, the provisions of the J W.P.No.l822 of 2025 Essential Commodities Act cannot be invoked in this case and the order of the 2'd respondent is without any jurisdiction. He also referred to the findings in the lab reports of the respective ofhcers that the confiscated rnaterial is not high speed diesel and further that the 1't petitioner is not resorting to any manufacturing activity and that it is only a trader. It is therefore submitted that without verifuing any of the facts, the subject order has been passed.

4. The 3'd respondent has filed a counter affidavit and the leamed Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has relied upon the avennents in the counter affidavit. He submitted that the l't petitioner is using the distillate base oil for adulteration of diesel and therefore, the issue comes within the purview of the Essential Commodities Act. He submitted that 6-4. proceedings are appealable under Section 6-C of the Act and therefore, the Writ Petition is not maintainable at this stage.

5. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the issue to be decided in this case is whether distillate base oil which has been intercepted, seized and confiscated by the authorities, is an essential commodity and whether it would come wjlhin the purview of the Essential Commodities Act. It is noticed that 4 W.P.No.l822 of 202, ,-..,, on the complaint given by the 3'd respondent, the 4s respondent has intercepted and seized the vehicles containing the distillate base oil. It is not the case of the respondents that the petitioners claimed that the stock in the tankers was petroleum product or diesel and subsequently it was found to be distillate base oil. The claim of the petitioners all along is that they were transporting distillate base oil. Admittedly, the distillate base oil is not an essential commodity and also it does not come within the def,rnition of 'petroleum product' under the Telangana State Petroleum Products (Licensing and Regulation of Supplies) Order,

1980. In such a case, it is evident that the provisions of the'Essential Commodities Act would not be applicable. Though the allegation of the Department scems to be that the petitioner is using this material for adulteration ol diesel, no such material in support of the allegation has been brought on record and is also not referred to in the order under Section 6-.4. of the Essential Commodities Act.

6. In view of the same, this Cou( is satisfied that the distillate base oil which has been seized and confiscated does no1 lall within the purview of the Essential Commodities Act and thercfore, the order passed under Section 6-4. of the Essential Commodities Act is without I I I i 5 W.P.No.t E22 of2O25 jurisdiction. on the point ofjurisdiction itserf, this Court is incrined to accept the contentions ofthe petitioners. 7 8 The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ petition shall stand closed. To //TRUE COPYII SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD D PUTY REGISTRAR \.) ECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies, Secretariat Buildings, State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

2. The Collector and District Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District, Kongara Kalan, Ranga Reddy District.

3. The Deputy Tahsildar (Enforcement), Shadnagar Division, Shadnagar, Ranga Reddy District.

4. The Station House Officer, Nandigama Police Station, Nandigama Proper and Mandal, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District.

5. Two CCs to GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

8. One CC to SRI K.VENUMADHAV, Advocate [OPUC] 9. Two CD Copies S K d. HIGH COURT DATED:0410412025 ORDER WP.No.1822 ot 2025 ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. 1v\t. i tAF€ c J o o OB APR 2[25 t O55p41t)