AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The writ petition is filed for the following reliefs:
“ (i) for the issuance of a rule in the nature of writ of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 17-05-2022 passed by respondent no. 3, The District Magistrate cum Collector, Munger in Misc. Confiscation (Supply) Case No. 11/2014-15 whereby and whereunder the petition filed by the petitioners under section 6 A (3) (C) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 which is read as 6 A (5) (C) vide Essential Commodities (Bihar Amendment Act, 1978 (For short- E.C. Act) for payment of the amount of Rs. 9,17,407.50 (Rupees Nine Lakhs, Seventeen Thousand, Four Hundred and seven and 50 paise) with due interest which was the sale proceed of foodgrain in Confiscation Case No. 04/08-09 and was seized from the petitioners has been dismissed.
(ii)for the issuance of a rule in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to follow the provisions of E.C. Act in a just and proper manner.”
At this juncture, the Learned counsel for the respondents contended that Section 6(C) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 provides for the provision of appeal. Section 6(C) read as follows:
“6C. Appeal.― (1) Any person aggrieved by an order of confiscation under section 6A may, within one month from the date of the communication to him of such order, appeal to any judicial authority appointed by the State Government concerned and the judicial authority 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 6A is modified or annulled by such judicial authority, 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 6A, the person concerned is acquitted, and in either case it is not possible for any reason to 3[return the essential commodity seized ], 4[such persons shall, except as provided by sub-section (3) of section 6A, be paid] the price therefore 5[as if the essential commodity,] had been sold to the Government with reasonable interest calculated from the day of the seizure of 6 [the essential commodity] 7 [and such price shall be determined―
(i)in the case of food grains, edible oil seeds or edible oils, in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3B) of section 3;
(ii)in the case of sugar, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (3C) of section 3 ; and
(iii)in the case of any other essential commodity, in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 3. ].”
Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the Learned counsel for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.
Admittedly, from the reliefs prayed for in the writ petition, it is evident that the petitioners have an alternative remedy of appeal available under Section 6(C) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
The Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners intend to file an appeal before the concerned authority, but the limitation period for filing the appeal has lapsed. She prayed for a direction to the concerned authority to entertain the appeal in accordance with Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Taking into consideration that the petitioners have an alternative remedy for filing an appeal, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to file an appeal against the order passed under Section 6(A)(5)(C) raising all the grounds within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order before the authority concerned. The delay in filing the appeal shall be condoned by the concerned authority, and the authority shall dispose of the appeal within three months from the date of filing of the appeal.
With the above said observation, the Writ petition is disposed of.
Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.