K.C. Sharma, J. - (1.) Heard counsel for the parties.
(2.) On 8.9.72 two Enforcement Officers of Food and Civil Supplies Department inspected the firms M/s. Radhey Shyam Ravi Kumar and M/s. Vinod Kumar Pramod Kumar and in the course of inspection, seized 247 and 248 sugar bags from the aforesaid two firms as the same were found stocked in contravention of the Sugar Control Order. After seizure, the bags were produced before the District Collector along with an application under Section 6(A) of the Essential Commodities Act. The District Collector vide its order dated 22.11.1972 ordered confiscation of the aforesaid seized sugar bags. However, the learned District Judge, Bharatpur vide its order dated 20.12.72 set aside the order of District Collector, holding that disposal of the seized goods shall be done in terms of the judgment to be passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge in the criminal case. On 3.1.76, Chief Judicial Magistrate ordered sale of seized sugar and deposit the sale price with the Bank in the fixed term account for a period of six months. Accordingly, 246 sugar bags were sold for Rs. 1,09.400, while 248 bags were sold for Rs. 1,05,000 and this amount of sale price was deposited with the Govt. treasury. On 9.8.95 the accused respondents came to be acquitted by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Gangapur City and it was ordered that after expiry of the period of limitation prescribed for appeal, the amount of sugar be returned.
(3.) It appears that the aforesaid sum was not returned to the respondents and therefore, they submitted an application before the District Collect of with the request that aforesaid sum along with interest be ordered to be returned to them. Since hearing could not take place on the application of the respondent for considerable period, the respondents preferred a writ petition (SB Civil Writ Petition No. 718/98) before this court. Thereafter, pursuant to the order dated 5.9.98 passed in the above writ petition, the District Collector on 2.6.99 ordered that the amount received against sale of sugar be returned to the respondents. However, the District Collector declined to award any interest. The respondents then preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge considering the provisions of Essential Commodities Act, concluded that after their acquittal, the respondents were entitled to receive the amount of sale price of seized sugar, along with reasonable interest. Accordingly, the learned Sessions Judge vide its judgment dated 29.8.2002 awarded interest at the rate of 10% p.a. for the period from 4.10.1976 to 2.6.1999. Feeling aggrieved by this judgment, the petitioners. namely, the State of Rajasthan through District Collector and District Supply Officers have preferred this petition invoking inherent jurisdiction of this court.;