TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (5) TMI 877
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate Government, with a view to implement the Prime Minister Gramodaya Yojana, decided to import weaning food for its free distribution to the children in the State of Uttar Pradesh. In furtherance of that decision, the State Government placed orders with the petitioner for supply of the weaning food. The petitioner accordingly dispatched a consignment of weaning food. The Assistant Commissioner, Trade Tax, Mohan Nagar Check-Post, Ghaziabad, detained 246 bags of weaning food on February 27, 2004. In the detention notice dated February 27, 2004, according to the petitioner, it was set out that 246 bags of Pushtahar (weaning food) were sent from Faridabad to Bal Vikas Parijoyana Adhikari, Ballia on bilti, but the consignee has not given any form XXXII nor any declaration under form XXXI and, hence, the goods valued at Rs. 1,37,700 were detained, on which the Central sales tax at the rate of four per cent was also charged. The petitioner filed a writ petition, being Writ Petition No. 334 of 2004. This court, by order dated March 10, 2004, issued direction that, on furnishing security on the amount of tax payable on goods by the petitioner, the goods shall be released forthwith by respo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sdiction. However, the court permitted the petitioner to file a reply to the show-cause notice. It is pointed out that the seizure orders were passed on April 12, 2004, i.e., before the decision in Writ Petition No. 524 of 2004. According to petitioner, he filed applications under section 13A(6) of the Act, before the Deputy Commissioner, Trade Tax, Kotban, Mathura, against the seizure order dated April 12, 2004. The applications were rejected by order dated April 26, 2004. The record would show that the petitioner filed only one appeal against the order of the Deputy Commissioner dated April 26, 2004 in respect of the goods relating to Truck No. HR.38C/6795, being Appeal No. 228 of 2004. An order came to be passed on June 24, 2004 directing release of the goods. On July 24, 2004, the petitioner filed four separate appeals, being Appeal Nos. 306 of 2004, 307 of 2004, 308 of 2004, and 209 of 2004 against four separate orders dated April 26, 2004, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Trade Tax (Help Centre), Mathura. The petitioner also moved an application under section 12B of the Act, annexing a letter of Upper Pariyojana Prabandhak dated July 23, 2004, contending that the deliver....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the petitioner could not be accepted and the petitioner should get the goods released in its favour. There were further correspondences exchanged between the parties. It is the case of the petitioner that it was the duty of the Department to have given the samples for testing at the time of seizure and since the goods had become waste and useless, the respondents are liable for payment of the value of the goods to the petitioner. Reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it is set out that the petition raises disputed questions of fact and, as such, the petition is not maintainable. It is further set out that what is in issue is the seizure of five consignments, which were detained on March 30/31, 2004 and in respect of which show cause notices dated April 1, 2004 were issued to the petitioner. The goods in question were packed in strong HDPE laminated bags and they were still in the same form and condition as they were at the time of seizure of the goods and the petitioner neither requested for sampling or testing of the goods at the time of seizure of goods nor itself took the sample and nor moved any application in this regard at any point of time, except fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rdened for oppressive and capricious act of the public officers or it be paid by those responsible for it. The administrative law of accountability of public authorities for their arbitrary and even ultra vires actions has taken many strides. It is now accepted both by this court and English courts that the State is liable to compensate for loss or injury suffered by a citizen due to arbitrary actions of its employees. In State of Gujarat v. Memon Mahomed Haji Hasam AIR 1967 SC 1885, the order of the High Court directing payment of compensation for disposal of seized vehicles without waiting for the outcome of decision in appeal was upheld both on principle of bailee's, 'legal obligation to preserve the property intact and also the obligation to take reasonable care of it . . . to return it in the same condition in which it was seized' and also because the Government was, 'bound to return the said property by reason of its statutory obligation or to pay its value if it had disabled itself from returning it either by its own act or by act of its agents and servants'. It was extended further even to bona fide action of the authorities if it was contrary to law in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Geddis v. Proprietors of Bann Reservoir [1878] 3 AC 430, thus: 'I take it, without citing cases, that it is now thoroughly well established that no action will lie for doing that which the Legislature has authorised, if it be done without negligence, although it does occasion damage to anyone; but an action does lie for doing what the Legislature has authorised, if it be done negligently.' Under our Constitution sovereignty vests in the people. Every limb of the constitutional machinery is obliged to be people oriented. No functionary in exercise of statutory power can claim immunity, except to the extent protected by the statute itself. Public authorities acting in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions oppressively are accountable for their behaviour before authorities created under the statute like the commission or the courts entrusted with responsibility of maintaining the rule of law. Each hierarchy in the Act is empowered to entertain a complaint by the consumer for value of the goods or services and compensation. The word 'compensation' is again of very wide connotation. It has not been defined in the Act. According to dictionary it means, &#....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....act is involved, jurisdiction of this court under article 226 of the Constitution of India is not a proper remedy, the petition should be dismissed. In the case of Chairman, Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd. (GRIDCO) v. Smt. Sukamani Das AIR 1999 SC 3412, as also in the case of Orissa Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. v. Bharati Industries [2005] 10 JT SC 19, the Supreme Court has reiterated the position, that cases involving disputed questions of fact in contractual matters cannot be gone into by a writ court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction. The view taken in Chairman, Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd. (GRIDCO) AIR 1999 SC 3412, was reiterated in S.D.O. Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd. v. Timudu Oram [2005] AIR SCW 3715. Considering the judgment in Chairman, Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd. (GRIDCO) AIR 1999 SC 3412, the Supreme Court held that actions in tort and negligence were required to be established initially by the claimants. Our attention is also invited to an order dated April 15, 2011 passed by this Bench in Anmol Coal Traders, Chandauli v. State of U.P. Writ Tax No. 250 of 2011, wherein the petitioner had raised an issue that its trucks were illegally detained a....