I.P Mukerji, J.:— Today, this court has the determination of Dipankar Datta, J. This application is taken up from His Lordship's list.
The petitioner No. 1 is a kerosene agent. He receives an allocated quantity from Indian Oil Corporation, which he is required to supply to the kerosene dealers for onward distribution to the ration card holders.
The allegation of the respondent authorities, against the petitioner No. 1 is that he had made delivery of 71494 litres of this oil, which was excessive, from January, 2012 to June, 2012. The petitioners' defence is that a detailed inventory of stock and accounts was maintained by them and submitted to the respondent authorities. Hence, there could be no discrepancy.
In adjudication of the show-cause notice dated 8th April, 2013, the Director of Consumer Goods passed an order on 22nd July, 2013 imposing a penalty of Rs. 26,08,816/-. Furthermore, the monthly allocation of kerosene to the petitioner No. 1 was reduced by 12,000 litres in one year commencing from 1st September, 2013.
It goes without saying that the charges in the show-cause notice were upheld by the adjudicating authority.
The adjudication concerned, involved determination of facts which has been made erroneously by the director, according to the petitioners. If the petitioners' case would have been accepted, there is no doubt that, the petitioners would have been exonerated from the charges.
Para 10 of the West Bengal Kerosene Control Order 1968 provides for an appeal from this kind of an order. Since questions of fact are involved. I think, the petitioners be relegated to this forum. Order accordingly. If they prefer an appeal by 6 September, 2013, the appellate authority will dispose of the same by 31 December, 2013. All points are kept open before it. Since it was submitted that the appellate authority had no power to grant any interim order, the order dated 22 July, 2013 as far as it relates to reduction in allocation of kerosene by 12,000 litres, will remain stayed till the decision by the appellate authority and will abide by it.
However, the petitioners will maintain with utmost care an inventory of stock and accounts which is to be submitted periodically to the respondent authorities.
The penalty of Rs. 26,08,816/- is to be deposited. The respondent authorities will notify forthwith the name of the officer to whom or the department to which the penalty is to be paid. The writ petitioners will deposit the penalty accordingly by 6 September, 2013. The respondent authorities will keep this penalty amount in a separate interest bearing account to the credit of the writ petitioner.
If there is breach in any of the conditions mentioned above, the interim order will stand vacated.
This writ application is disposed accordingly.
Let a plain photocopy of this order, duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court), be given to the learned advocate for the parties on usual undertakings.