JAWAHAR LAL GUPTA,J - (1.) THE Punjab State Co-operative Supply and Marketing Federation (hereinafter referred to as the MARKFED) is aggrieved by the orders passed under Clause 31 of the Fertiliser (Control) Order, 1985 by which its Registration Certificate for bulk sale of 'Super Phospate' has been cancelled on the ground that it was selling sub-standard fertliser. These orders are challenged primarily on two grounds. Mr. Hemant Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner buys Super Phosphate directly from the manufacturer and sells it in sealed bags. He contends that the manufacturer is the only defaulter. No proceedings having been initiated against the manufacturer, the action against the petitioner is vitiated. Secondly, he submits that the order suffers from a legal infirmity inasmuch as the deficiency in the sample was within the permissible tolerance limit prescribed under the Control Order.
(2.) NEITHER of these contentions has any merit So far as the first contention is concerned, a perusal of the written statement shows that a complaint under Section 19 (1) of the Control Order has been filed in the Court of Mr. M. S. Ahluwalia, Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. A copy of this complaint has been produced as Annexure R. 1 with the written statement One of the accused persons named in this complaint is the Production Manager of M/s Shivalik Fertilizers. Consequently, it is apparent that the respondents have proceeded to take action against the manufacturer. Mr. Gupta, however, submits that while in the case of the petitioner the registration certificate for the sale of Super Phosphat has been cancelled, no similar action has been taken against the manufacturer. He has referred to the averment made in paragraph 5 (b) of the petition, wherein it has been mentioned that appears that the manufacturer has not been even given the show cause notice for suspension or cancellation of registration for the manufacture of the fertilisers . " This averment has been specifically denied in the written statement. It has been inter alia averred that the "manufacturer was also served with a show cause notice and case has been registered against Shri Rajinder Singh, Production Manager of M/s Shivalik Fertilizer Ltd No application has been filed. Consequently, it is apparent that action has been initiated against the manufacturer. In this situation, the contention raised by the learned counsel has no merit. It is, consequently, rejected. Equally lacking on merit is the second contention. It has been contended that a sample of super phosphate, (Granulated) was taken from the godown of the petitioner. According to the learned counsel, the tolerance limit prescribed for such a fertiliser is 0.6. Reliance in support of this contention has been placed on clause (4) of Schedule-I (B). A perusal of Clause (1) in this Schedule shows that in case of fertilisers which contain less than 20 per cent plant nutrients, the prescribed tolerance limit is 0.1. In case of granulated mixture with the nutrient level of 16 to 20, the required tolerance level is 0.6. There is nothing on record to show that Super phosphate sold by the petitioner is a granulated mixture In fact, granulated mixture has been defined in Clause 2 (k) of the Control Order in the following terms :- "granulated mixture" means a mixure of fertilisers made by intimately mixing two or more fertilisers with or without inert material and granulating them together, without involving any chemical reaction."
(3.) A perusal of the above provision shows that a mixture of two or more fertilisers when granulated together would be called granulated mixture as contemplated in clause (4) Super Phosphate whether granulated or powdered is not shown to be a mixture of two or more fertilisers. As such, it would be covered by Clause (1) and not under Clause (4). In fact, such a plea was never raised before either of the respondents. Consequently, even this plea cannot be accepted. No other point has been urged.;