Judgment:
ORDER
B. Subhashan Reddy, J
1. This writ petition has been filed questioning the action of the 4th respondent in sealing the bottling plant of the petitioner asserting that the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Petroleum Products (Licensing and Regulation of Supplies) Order, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Order of 1980'), which was framed in exercise of the powers under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, cannot be invoked against the petitioner.
2. The petitioner is a bottling unit established at Nemam village near Kakinada of East Godavari district pursuant to the liberalised policy of the Government relating to Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG). Before this liberalised policy, the Government PetroleumCompanies enjoyed the monopoly. In exercise of the powers contained under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, Liquid Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Central Order of 1993') has been issued, which enables the persons other than the Government Companies also to manufacture, sale and distribute the LPG. The petitioner conies within the definition of 'parallel marketer'. It is pertinent to mention that parallel marketing system is allowed to be run under the Central Order of 1993 in addition to the public distribution system.
3. The prime question for consideration in this case is as to whether the provisions of State Order of 1980 still operate in the field of LPG in the wake of Central Order of 1993?
4. The State Order of 1980 does not speak of a parallel marketer. In fact, we had an occasion to deal with a similar question in WP No.4153 of 1995 regarding Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Ceiling Price) Order, 1993. It was held in that case Ihat when the Central Order operates, State Order is inapplicable and that kerosene dealt by parallel marketer under the parallel marketing system is governed by the Central Order on kerosene and not by the provisions of the State Order of 1980. But, in the area not covered by the above Central Order, it was held that the said order is applicable regarding me exercise of powers of seizure and subjecting the same to the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. In the instant case, as the power of entry, search and seizure are provided in Clause -11 of the Central Order of 1993, the seizure can be effected only under the Central Order of 1993 and not under the State Order of 1980. This is so because the Central Order of 1993 is a self-contained one. Under the Central Order of 1993, the Clauses which are applicable to the parallel marketer are 4,5, lOand II. Clause 4 restricts storage and transport of LPG, while Clause 5regulates sale and distribution of LPG. The said Clauses 4 and 5 have to be read with the Schedule relating to parallel marketer like the petitioner herein. The said Clauses 4 and 5 are no way concerned with the obtaining of any licence by the parallel marketer of LPG. Under Clause 10 of the Central Order of 1993 the petitioner was obligated to intimate to the Central Government in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas his intention to engage in the activities of manufacturing, bottling and marketing LPG specifying therein the capability to do so and other relevant particulars and also to submit a monthly return before the 15th of the following month giving details of liquified petroleum gas imported port-wise to the Central Government in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and to furnish to the Central Government in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas or to such authority as may be specified by the Central Government in this regard, such other information as may be required.
5. It is not disputed that the petitioner is obligated to inform of his intention to involve in the activities mentioned above relating to LPG, to the concerned Controller of Explosives of the Central Government and to furnish such particulars as may be required by the said authority. Such an obligation has been discharged by the petitioner and the requisite licence has been granted by the concerned Deputy Controller of Explosives, South Circle, Madras. Excepting this obligation, there is no other obligation cast on the petitioner regarding obtaining of the licence and the stand taken by the State Government that the petitioner is obligated to obtain licence under the State Order of 1980 is untenable. In fact, the State Order of 1980, as already stated above, is not at all applicable to the case of the petitioner, who is a parallel marketer under the Central Order of 1993. Excepting the above allegation that the petitioner had not obtained licence under the State Order of 1980, thereis no other allegation against him and as such, the impugned action of seizing and sealing of the unit of the petitioner relating to LPG is unsustainable and is accordingly set aside. It is made clear that the petitioner shall be entitled to go ahead with his business activities in LPG as a parallel marketer by complying the obligations under Clauses 4, 5 and 10 of the Central Order of 1993 and it is also made clear that should there be any contravention of the obligations specified in the above Clauses, the authorities of the State Government, i.e.. Vigilance Cell, Civil Supplies, has got power of entry, storage and seizure as contemplated under Clause 11 of the Central Order of 1993 and if any contravention of Clauses 4,5 and 10 of the Central Order of 1993 is pointed-out, action under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 can always be taken by the authorities. But, in the instant case, as no such violations are alleged, the seizure effected and the consequent sealing of the unit of the petitioner are illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition isallowed. No order as to costs.