Ashraf vs Commissioner -Civil Supplies, O/o Civil Supplies Commissioner, Trivandrum-695 001, District Collector, Collectorate, Civil Station, Kakkanad, Ernakulam, Cochin-682 030 and Sub Inspector of Police, Oonnukal Police Station, Kothamangalam Taluk, Ernakulam District, Pincode-686 698

S. Siri Jagan, J.—Petitioner''s vehicle was seized on allegations of violation of the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act (''the Act'' for short). The petitioner sought release of the vehicle. by Ext.P1 order, the District Collector directed release of the vehicle. The said order reads as under:

As reported vide reference cited 1st, the seized stock of 12000 Ltrs. PDS. Keroseneoil involved in Crime No. 85/10 of Kothamangalam Police Station was handed over to the District Collector, Kottayam for distributing through PDS. vide reference cited 2nd. The KWD No.74, M/s. Abdul Razak & Co. of Kanjirappally Taluk has seen taken delivery of the stock from the Police Station on behalf of the District Collector, Kottayam.

Now Sri. Asharaf, S/o. Muthimeera of Thodupuzha Taluk has submitted application for the release of the vehicle involved in this case, stating his ignorance and innocence in the incident. He claims that the workers of the tanker lorry has taken the vehicle to the mentioned premises instead of going to the designated destination, the KWD of M/s. K. Kunjumohammed & Sons at Mundakayam in Idukki District and requested the release of the vehicle at the earliest.

The Hon''ble Judicial 1st Class Magistrate court has seen entrusted the vehicle as well to the District Collector, for the disposal. The Police has also reported that the applicant Sri. Asharaf is the registered owner of the seized vehicle.

In the circumstances following orders are issued:

ORDER

Keeping of tanker lorry in the police custody for a long period will cause damage of the vehicle. Hence the Tanker Lorry No. KL-7/P.2009 involved in Crime No. 85/10 is hereby released to the registered owner. The Police will release the vehicle on getting required sureties and report compliance.

This order is issued vide Section 6A of EC. Act, 1955.

The Commissioner of Civil Supplies initiated suo motu revision of Ext.P1 order and passed Ext.P2 order cancelling Ext.P1 order and directing the District Collector to take appropriate action u/s 6A of the Act. The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 order on the ground that the Commissioner of Civil Supplies has no suo motu power to review an order passed by the District Collector u/s 6A of the Act. According to the petitioner, admittedly, Ext.P1 order has been expressly stated to be passed u/s 6A of the Act. Although an appeal is provided, there is no suo motu power on the Commissioner of Civil Supplies under the Act, is the contention raised.

The learned Government Pleader relies on clause 18 of the Kerala Kerosine Control Order, which gives power to the Government or the Commissioner of Civil Supplies to suo motu call for and examine the records of any order passed by the subordinate authority under the provisions of that order. But the counsel for the petitioner points out that that power is against the orders passed under the provisions of the Kerala Kerosine Control Order and not against the order passed under the Essential Commodities Act.

I find considerable merit in the contention of the petitioner. The Essential Commodes Act does not provide for any powers on the Commissioner of Civil Supplies to pass orders in the nature of Ext.P2. Accordingly, Ext.P2 is quashed.

But, that is not the end of the matter. Going by Ext.P1 order, I find that it is only an interim order giving interim custody of the vehicle to the petitioner on the petitioner furnishing sufficient surety for the release of the vehicle. Even otherwise, I am throughly dissatisfied with the way in which the District Collector has passed that order. The District Collector has not considered anything in respect of the subject as to whether the petitioner is guilty of any violation of the Essential Commodities Act and simply directed release of the vehicle. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Collector to pass final orders in the matter pursuant to the issue of the petitioner''s vehicle, giving reasons for the same, after complying with the formalities prescribed for such consideration, as expeditiously as possible, at any ate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.