Pradyot Kumar Banerjee, J. - (1.) The petitioner is a partnership firm and deals in foodgrains and oil seeds. The petitioner No. 1 Messrs. Munilal Bhagawat Saran is the holder for value of several Railway Receipts having been negotiated through Bank in Calcutta, upon payment made by the petitioner firm. The Railway Receipts are quite a number issued between 11th October, 1967 and 15th October, 1067. The said Railway Receipt is for carrying on maize and bazra from different stations in Haryana to Howrah. It is alleged that the State of Haryana is a surplus State in foodgrains but there was a ban on export of maize from the said State imposed by the Northern Inter Zonal (Movement Control) Order, 1967. It is alleged that the State Government of Haryana lifted the ban on export of maize and other coarse grains including bazra outside the State of Haryana from October, 1967. It is further alleged that an announcement to the said effect was made at Karnal by the then Hon'ble Chief Minister of Haryana on October 11, 1967. The said lifting of ban on the export of maize was broadcast in the news bulletin and was also published in various newspapers. The Tribune, a daily published from Ambala, within the State of Haryana, in its issue dated October, 12, 1967 published the following Press Note: "Haryana Ban on coarse Grain Movement goes-- F. O. S. O. Chandigarh October 11, 1967. The Haryana Government has decided to remove the restriction on the movement on coarse grains produced in the State of Haryana during the current Kharif season says an Official Press Note. The major coarse grains are Bazra, Maize and Jowar." In the same issue of Tribune it has been published as follows :-- "The Chief Minister disclosed that Haryana Government today ordered the lifting of ban on the export of Bazra, Jowar and Maize to ensure grains' of farmers. The Government would also do its best to ensure a suitable price of paddy." On the basis of this announcement the wagons containing maize and bazra from various stations in the Stale of Haryana during the period between 12th October, 1967 to 16th October, 1967 were despatched and it was duly booked by the Railway authorities at the despatching stations and the movement was allowed by the Railway authorities without any objections whatsoever. Further in view of the lifting of the ban on export of maize and bazra by the Haryana Government, the District Food Controllers in the State of Haryana under whose jurisdiction the respective despatching Railway Stations referred to in the said Railway Receipts are situate duly authorised the despatch of the goods under the said Railway Receipts and endorsements of such authorisation were also made by the appropriate authorities of Food Department of the State of Haryana. Such authorisation of the export of foodgrains outside the State of Haryana also appears from the memo dated 28th October, 1967 written by the Secretary to the Government of Haryana to the Chief Commercial Superintendent, Eastern Railway wherein it has been stated that though the Government of Haryana allowed to despatch the maize and bazra at Howrah but when it reached at Howrah the delivery was wrongfully refused. It is stated also that the Railway Receipts presented by the representatives at this office did not bear any export permit numbers and as such this office was not in a position to arrange delivery of the goods unless the petitioners can produce any permit from the Regional Director (Food), Government of India, 8, Esplanade East, Calcutta. It is alleged that the similar consignment of maize despatched from Haryana to Delhi and other stations were duly released. It is also alleged that such delivery was effected in different stations of West Bengal. Be that as it may, the Railway authorities of Howrah refused to deliver the maize to the petitioner. Thereafter the Collector of Howrah issued a notice on the petitioner under Section 6-B of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 to make representation in writing against the maize exported by the petitioner. It is alleged that the petitioners have abetted the export of or exported 229 bags of maize from Karnal to Howrah without any permit. Being aggrieved by the said notice the petitioner moved this Court and obtained the present rule. Under the order of the Court the maize etc. imported by the petitioner was allowed to be sold by the Joint Receiver appointed by this Court and after deducting their remuneration and also other expenses, the balance of sale proceed was directed to be deposited in Court.
(2.) Mr. R. C. Deb on behalf of the petitioner contended firstly that the maize was imported in accordance with law, inasmuch as, Haryana Government withdrew the ban for importation. Secondly Mr. Deb contended that by the notice in Annexure "B" to the petition, the authorities concerned have already made up their mind before the issue of the notice, about the confiscation and as such the officer concerned had no open mind which is essential in a matter of a quasi-judicial proceeding.
(3.) Mr. Sankar Das Banerjee on behalf of the respondent contended that there was no order made under the Essential Commodities Act withdrawing the ban imposed under Clause (3) of the Maize Control Order. Secondly it is contended by Mr. Banerjee that as the respondent invited the representation from the petitioner it cannot be said that the said respondent had already a closed mind in regard to the matter.;