Writ Petition No. 11303 of 1999 · Madras High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are granted liberty to file an appeal before the designated appellate authority, as provided under the law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.…
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 15-11-2007CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.11303 of 19991.P.Palanisamy2.N.K.R.Velmurugan.. Petitioners. VersusThe District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore... Respondent. Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiapraying for the issuance of a Writ of certiorari calling for the entire records relating to Na.Ka.No.851/99-K3, dated nil 3/99, impugned order passed by the respondent herein and quash the same. For petitioners : Mr.C.Prakasam For respondent : Mr.R.Jothimanian Government Advocate
O R D E RHeard Mr.C.Prakasam, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.R.Jothimanian , the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.
It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that 140 bags of paddy, which were being transported from Dharapuram to the 2nd petitioner's Rice Mill situated at Vedachandur, Angalakurichi, Pollachi Taluk, had been seized by the respondent, alleging that the paddy was not covered by the Cess permit issued by the MarketCommittee.
The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that as per the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Market CommitteeAct, the Licenced Dealer is to pay the Cess only after the paddy reaches the place or premises of business and that it is not necessary that the Cess permit be carried along with the goods in transit. It has also been submitted that the respondent had conducted an enquiry without issuing anotice to the 2nd petitioner as required under law.
It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent that as against the impugned order passed by the respondent, a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ statutory appeal is available to the petitioner, under Section 6-C of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Section 6-C of the Essential CommoditiesAct, 1955, reads as follows:6-C.Appeal.- (1) Any person aggrieved by an order of confiscation under Section 6-A may, within one month from the date of the communication to him of such order, appeal to the State Government concerned and the State Government shall, after giving an opportunity to the appellant to be heard, pass such order as it may think fit, confirming, modifying or annulling the order appealed against. (2) Where an order under Section 6-A is modified or annulled by the State Government, or where in a prosecution instituted for the contravention of the order in respect of which an order of confiscation has been made under Section 6-A, the person concerned is acquitted, and in either case it is not possible for any reason to return the essential commodity seized, such persons shall, except as provided by sub-section (3) of section6-A, be paid the price therefor as if the essential commodity had been sold to the Government with reasonable interest calculated from the day of the seizure of the essential commodity and such price shall be determined -(i) in the case of food grains, edible oilseeds or edible oils, in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3-B) of section 3;(ii) in the case of sugar, in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3-C) of section3 ; and(iii) in the case of any other essential commodity, in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 3.
However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had submitted that at the time of the filing of the writ petition, the appellate authority had not been designated, as provided under the Act. Therefore, the petitioners have come before this Court, by way of filing the present writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is also submitted that at present the District Court, Pudukkottai, has been designated as the appellate forum, under Section 6-C of the EssentialCommodities Act, 1955, to hear and decide the appeals.
Operative part
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are granted liberty to file an appeal before the designated appellate authority, as provided under the law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such appeal being filed, the appellate authority is expected to dispose of the same expeditiously. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Sd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.cshTo1. The District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore.2. The District Judge[Appellate Authority],Pudukkottai.+ 1 CC to the Government Pleader SR NO 67743Writ Petition No.11303 of 1999VRK[CO]GP/27.11.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.