Orissa

Jajapur

CC/57/2016

Sri Satyabrata Rout. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri B.K.Nandi,Deputy Director Mining,Jajpur Road Circle. - Opp.Party(s)

Surendra Kumar Panda

21 Jun 2017

ORDER

                IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Shri Jiban ballav Das , President

                                                                            2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                            3.Miss Smita Ray,Lady Member.              

                                                    Dated the  21st day of June,2017.

                                                             C.C.Case No.57 of 2016

Sri Satyabrata Rout   S/O Late Rajkishore Rout

Proprietor,M/S Laxmi Narayan Coal Depot

At.- Upper Baruan  ,P.O. Kabirpur ,

P.S.Jajpur Sadar Dist.-Jajpur.

                                                                                                                         ……....Complainant .                                                                      

                   (Versus)

1.Sri B.K.Nandi ,Deputy Director mining, Jajpur Road Circle ,Dist. Jajpur  .

2.Sri Asit Kumar Behera, Mining Officer, Jajpur Road Circle ,

Both At. Dhabalgiri,P.O .Sobra,P.S. Jajpur Road, Dist. Jajpur.

                                                                                                                            ……………..Opp.Parties.             

For the Complainant:                         Sri  Surendra ku.Panda,Advocate .

For the OPP.Party : 1                         Sri  B.K.Nandi.(Deputy Director)

For the Opp.Party:2                           Sri Asit Ku.Behera .(Mining Officer)                                                                                                  

                                                                                                            Date of order: 21.06.2017.

SHRI JIBAN BALLAV DAS , PRESIDENT. 

            The petitioner who is a business man dealing in procurement , storage and sale of coal filed this case alleging deficiency of service and unfair /unlawful practice by the O.Ps.

            The brief facts of the petitioner’s case is that the petitioner applied for trade license in the prescribed format vide his application No.NLA7425/2014 dt.12.05.2014 . The O.ps after due procedure and verification granted license to the petitioner which was valid from 25.06.2014 to 24.06.2015. The petitioner continued his business on the strength of license and before expiry of the said period ,he again applied for renewal of his license on 08.06.15 online to the competent authority which was renewed from 25.06.2015 to 24.06.2019 and the petitioner obtained  the online copy on 24.12.2015.The petitioner by observing rules and procedure was running his business and procured and purchased coal 100.00MTs by paying  costs of Rs.4,72,500/-  from registered firm sagar Coal Depot, Manguli, Cuttack vide cash Memo No.350 dt.28.01.2016 ,No.351 dt.28.01.2016, No.352 dt.29.01.2016,No.354 dt.30.01.2016,No.360 dt.05.02.2016 ,No.369 dt.09.02.2016 and No.370 dt.10.02.2016.

            On 12.02.16 suddenly without giving prior notice the O.p.no.2 arrived at the Coal Depo of the petitioner and seized the above quantity of coal and kept the same under the custody of Ajit Kumar Rout of vill. Mallikapur without observing rules and procedures, which is illegal and high handed action to harass the petitioner . Due to illegal action of the O.Ps the petitioner sustained monetary loss ,mental agony  and also the business reputation . The image of  petitioner was a be-littled  before others . The petitioner by obtaining loan from different Nationalized Banks  carried on his business and the interest due is going on increasing day by day. The petitioner has sustained monetary loss of Rs.75,000/- and also claimed Rs.20,000/- for  mental agony and illegal harassment.

            The cause of action arose on 12.02.16 when the O.Ps without any justification and sufficient cause illegally  seized the lawfully purchased /procured coal having valid license . The petitioner filed this case wherein he prayed to pass order for immediate release of the seized property and compensate of Rs.95,000/- for monetary loss and mental agony ,harassment etc. Hence this case filed by the petitioner supported  by an affidavit.

            The O.P in response to the notice appeared and filed written objection denying the averments made by the petitioner in his complaint petition. It is contended by the O.P that the petitioner taking advantages of the error in the online system by ITPMU,  procured 100 MT of coal during the month of January and February-2016 which is a serious  violation of rules. It is further stated that after rectification of the error on dt.11.02.2017 in the online system and as per the order of the Deputy Director Mines, Jajpur Road the material/ coal on 100 MT has been seized on ground of unauthorized storing of coal after expiry of the license period.

            Heard both the sides at the length in the matter .

            The petitioner during the course of argument contended that he has procured and purchased the coal from  M/S Laxminarayan Coal Depot which was within the knowledge of the O.Ps and under a valid license. Further stated that without giving prior notice the O.pno.2 seized the same and handed over those coals to one 3^rd party which is illegal, unlawful and open violation of law and rules in force. The petitioner also challenged the plea of the O.ps in para-4 of the parawise comments that the error was rectified on 11.02.2017 but the petitioner procured and purchased the coal in between 28.01.2016 to 10.02.2016 when the license of the petitioner to purchase and

procured was valid. As such it was the duty of the service provider to follow the system and intimate the petitioner before taking any drastic action causing loss to the petitioner. Like wise the show cause of the O.P vide letter No.384/Mines/Dt.17.02.2016 which is also much after the purchase and procurement of the coal as stated vide Annexture-3 to 9 in between 28.01.2016 to 10.02.2016 . Therefore, the petitioner asserted that during the valid license he procured and purchased the coal and carried on his business which was within the knowledge and approval of the O.ps. The petitioner also claimed that he is a consumer U/S 2(d)(II) of C.P. Act 1986 and is entitled for compensation for the negligence of the O.Ps due to whose action the petitioner sustained loss.

            The O.P during the course of argument that show cause notice was served after seizure of 100 MT of coal dt.16.02.16  as per Rule-12(6) of Orissa Minerals (P.T.S.I.M.R.P.S.T.T)Rules-2007. Section-12 under chapter-5 provides that:

Seizure and confiscation-(1) The competent Authority or any other officer specially authorized in this behalf by the Govt. shall seize under sub-section(4) of section 21 of the Act, any minerals(s) raised, transported or caused to be raised or transported, stored ,sold supplied ,distributed ,delivered for sale or processed without any lawful authority and also he tool(s) ,equipment(s) or any other thing(s) used for the said purpose.

(2) After seizing any property under sub-rule(1), he shall keep such property under his custody with proper official seal and with detailed information in Form-N indicating that the same has been seized by him and shall ,except where the offender agrees in writing to get the offence compounded, either produce the same before the competent authority having jurisdiction or make a report of such seizure to the court competent to take cognizance of the offence and the court will try the offence on account of which the seizure has been made.

2A. In case the offender applies in writing for compounding the offence, the officer who has seized the property shall if he is the competent authority proceed under rule 16 and, if he is not the Competent Authority ,he shall make a report in writing to the Competent Authority along with all records)

3.Upon receipt of any report under Sub-rule(2),the court shall except where the offence has been compounded, take such measures, as may be necessary for arrest and trial of the offender and disposal of the property according to law.

4. The minerals which are the property of Government  and in respect of which an offence has been  committed, shall be liable for confiscation including all tools machineries and vehicle by an order of the Court .

5.When the trial of any offence is concluded ,the mineral(s) in respect of which  such offence(s) have been committed shall, if it is the property of Government or have been confiscated, be taken to charge of by the competent authority, and in any other case may be disposed of in such manner as the court or Competent Authority ,may direct.

6.Where the Competent Authority is of the opinion that an offence was committed in respect of any mineral and the offender is not known or can not be found, he may take possession and confiscate the mineral(s) tool(s) machinery(s) and shall dispose of the same through public auction or in such manner as the Government may decide.

            Provided that before making any such order, the Competent Authority shall cause a notice to be served upon any person, who he has the reason to believe, is interested in the mineral property seized or shall publish such notice in such manner as deemed fit.

            After going through the provision of section-12 it is cristal clear that the O.P never observed the Orissa Minerals (P.T.S.I.M.R.P.S.T.T) Rules,2007 in letter and spirit . Thus the  search and seizure have not been properly conducted and giving seized coal to another person is no where prescribed in the rules. Soon after the seizure, seized property should have been brought  to the competent authority and the court, where trial of  the offence if any committed by the petitioner. But no such principle have been observed by the O.P after seizure of the coal from the petitioner. The plea of the O.P that the petitioner has taken the advantages  of the error in the online system by ITPMU and procured 100 MT of coal can not be accepted without any valid reason when the petitioner acted and carried on his business during his valid license period.   

Therefore there was no rhyme and reason for the O.P to conduct the search and seizure in such reckless manner  putting the petitioner in mental agony .Add to it the O.P who effected  the seizure appears not to have brought the same to the notice before the Competent Authority, creating gross violation of Orissa Minerals (P.T.S.I.M.R.P.S.TT) Rules,2007 and there was no justification of the O.P saying that the petitioner  took advantages  of the on line error   and what was the online error is not clear / clarified .

            Against this back drop we are of unanimous  opinion that there was no justification to conduct any search and seizure without notice to the petitioner . Further more there was flagrant violation of Orissa Minerals (P.T.S.I.M.R.P.S.T.T) Rules-2007 as explained above .  So the search and seizure of coal can not be said to be a valid action on the part of the O.Ps. Hence, after going through the Orissa Minerals Rules and documents filed by the petitioner , the conclusion is irresistible  that the petitioner was put to loss and injury due to the high handed action of the O.P who never followed the Orissa Minerals Rules before effecting the seizure of coal even after seizure, rules have not been followed . Therefore, there is much force in  the argument  by the petitioner and therefore the prayer of the petitioner need to be allowed .

Hence this order

            The petition filed by the petitioner is allowed against the O.P on contest. The O.p.no.1 is directed that the seized coal be immediately released and given in the custody of the petitioner. The petitioner having came to this Fora sustained mental agony, monetary loss and unlawful harassment and for that reason the O.P.no.1 shall pay Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) to the petitioner as compensation within one month after receipt of this order, failing which the petitioner is at liberty to take shelter as per law.

                    This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 21st day of June,2017. under my hand and seal of the Forum.