- (1.) CHALLENGE in the writ petition is to the order dated dated 19th February, 2012 whereby the petitioner's authorization for dealing wholesale in the commodity kerosene oil was suspended by the District Collector, Sawai Madhopur under the provisions of rule 8(2) of the Rajasthan Food Grains and Other Essential Articles (Regulation and Distribution) Order, 1976 (hereinafter to be referred in short as 'the Order, 1976'). Even though a challenge to the said order dated 19th February, 2012 before the Appellate Authority also failed on the appeal having been dismissed vide order dated 29th May, 2012. Relief now claimed is in view of the 90 days ex-parte suspension period having expired which according to the petitioner is an event subsequent to the dismissal of the statutory appeal and by itself furnishes a fresh and independent cause of action for laying the present writ petition.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner has submitted that as order of suspension dated 19th February, 2012 was passed without an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner with reference to rule 8(2) of the Order, 1976, it cannot continue beyond a period of 90 days of being passed. He submits that as of today, the period of 90 days has quite apparently lapsed and on this count alone the order of suspension dated 19th February, 2012 should be declared to be in-operative and the petitioner declared entitled to resumption of wholesale supply of kerosene oil for onward supply to retail fair price shop dealers authorized by the department. Article 14 and 19(1)(g) and right under the license have been invoked. Mr. K. Verma Addl. Government Counsel appearing for the department would submit that in spite of attempts to serve a show cause notices dated 13th March, 2012 and 12th July, 2012 on the petitioner for enquiry owing to breach of conditions of the authorization by the petitioner on 15/16th February, 2012 leading to the suspension dated 19th February, 2012 of his wholesale license by the District Supply Officer, Sawai Madhopur for consideration of the continuation of his suspension and for holding an enquiry, the petitioner has been playing truant and avoiding service. He submits that this court exercises equitable jurisdiction and should not come to the aid a petitioner who avoids service of a show cause notice issued under the Order, 1976 on the one hand and seeks to avail benefit of limited ex-parte suspension provided for under clause 8 of the Order, 1976. Counsel submits that in the event the petitioner were to be served with the show cause notice, the Licensing Authority would have had the occasion after hearing him of considering the question of continuation of the suspension of his licence beyond a period of 90 days and also addressing the merits of the charge against the petitioner in the show cause notice with the potential of the termination/cancellation of the license itself in view of the serious allegations of black-marketing of kerosene supplied for delivery on retail dealer. It is submitted that in this view of matter, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief and instead should be required to appear before the District Supply Officer, Sawai Madhopur and make his submissions as to why the order of suspension dated 19th February, 2012 should not be continued and as to why following an inquiry in terms of the show cause notice, his license should not be cancelled. I have heard Mr. Keshav Agarwal counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. Verma, Addl. Government Counsel appearing for the respondent and perused the writ petition. The facts of the case are that a Tanker bearing Registration No. RJ 29 GA 1894 registered in the name of the petitioner, which was used for lifting kerosene oil from the Bharatpur depot and supplying it to various retail Fair Price Shop dealers in District Sawai Madhopur, was caught by the Police at District Karauli and found having decanted about 5850 litres of kerosene unauthorizedly and further in the process of decanting the remaining 6150 litres at a Hot Mix Plat at village Mahuke Tiwara, Tehsil Hindon, District Karauli. It thus, appeared to the department on being informed of the aforesaid fact and the FIR registered by the police that the case was prima facie of black-marketing of blue kerosene oil which was meant for distribution under the public distribution system at subsidized rates and had been made available to the petitioner as an authorized wholesale dealer by the Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Affairs Department, Government of Rajasthan. Consequent to aforesaid prima facie contravention of the license, the petitioner's authorization was suspended ex-parte as provided in law on 19th February, 2012 in the first instance under rule 8(2) of the Order of 1976. The allegations in the case are extremely serious in nature. It is universal knowledge that finances of this country are bleeding from subsiding petroleum products including kerosene oil. Comfort should lie in proper use of these subsided products and there should be zero tolerance of misuse, diversion and black-marketing. Issue of misuse of kerosene oil if proved, is an issue in which no quarter should be given to the authorized person found guilty and strict action should be taken with exemplary punishment including both cancellation of license and criminal prosecution. However, from the reply filed by the department, it is apparent that the petitioner is avoiding service of the show cause first issued on 13th March, 2012 and thereafter on 12th July, 2012. The department should have taken all measures including aid at the level of district administration to ensure service on the petitioner of the show cause notice. The officers of the department themselves appear to be derelict, if not complicit in their duty to ensure service on the petitioner who could not have been difficult to trace with a declared residential address. This raises grave suspension of their intent and I would therefore require the Collector to inquire and take action against the officers in the department found responsible for not ensuring service on the petitioner and allowing the matter to drag on for months when it is well known that following lapsing of 90 days of the passing of the order of suspension, the petitioner would be entitled to an automatic revocation of suspension if not heard. Be that as it may, the show cause notices which have been annexed with the reply to the writ petition are now in the knowledge of the petitioner and counsel for the petitioner fairly accepts the aforesaid fact. In this view of matter, I would direct the petitioner to appear before District Supply Officer, Sawai Madhopur with his reply to the show cause notice dated 12th July, 2012 on 24th September, 2012. On the reply being filed by the petitioner before the District Supply Officer, Sawai Madhopur, the petitioner should be heard on the date of filing reply and a reasoned order with regard to continuation of the petitioner's suspension as warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence on record be passed. Thereafter, the inquiry against the petitioner for breach of condition of license be completed within a peroid of eight weeks. However, in view of obtaining statutory interdict that an ex-parte suspension of the license cannot continue beyond a period of 90 days as same was passed without notice to the licensee, I would restore the authorization of the petitioner to deal as a wholesale dealer in petroleum products till passing of the order on suspension after hearing the petitioner on 24th September, 2012 and in no event beyond 1st October, 2012. The writ petition is disposed of with the directions aforementioned. ;