- (1.) BY the Court:- The petitioner in this petition has challenged the order dated 30.6.2009 passed by Additional Collector (Administration), Mathura confiscating his tanker under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and directing for its auction. He has further prayed for a direction to the respondents not to sell his tanker through public auction.
(2.) THE petitioner is a sole proprietorship firm engaged in transport business. Petitioner's tanker bearing registration no.HR38M/7957 was said to have been hired by one Suresh Singh for the purpose of transporting furnace oil. When the aforesaid tanker, loaded with furnace oil, was parked in the premises of the aforesaid Suresh Singh, a raid/inspection was conducted by the District Supply Officer and the tanker with other material was seized on 23.10.08. On the basis of the report of the Supply Inspector dated 20.12.2008 and the letter of the District Supply Officer dated 22.12.2008 a notice under Section 6-A of the Act was issued to the petitioner to show cause why the tanker may not be confiscated. The petitioner, in response, submitted his reply denying his involvement and connection with the illegal activity, if any, of transportation of essential commodities and at the same time requested for release of his tanker on the ground that he is merely a transporter. It is thereafter that the impugned order has been passed. We have heard Sri Rajeev Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel and with their consent proposes to decide the writ petition at this stage finally.
(3.) THE only argument advanced on behalf of the appellant is that in view of second proviso to Section 6-A(1) of the Act the petitioner was entitled to release of his vehicle on payment of the market value in lieu of its confiscation.;