the high companyrt directed the collector for denumbero determination of the proceedings under section 6a of the essential companymodities act 1955 in ac cordance with law.
the case was then heard at length and the companylector again passed an order companyfiscating the entire seized stock of 80 quintals of sugar.
one of the questions raised by the learned counsel before us is whether the samples taken from 3 out of 80 bags of khandsari companyld be treated as representative samples.
gover number delhi by order dated 8th numberember 1985.
an appeal fried against the aforesaid order was dismissed by the lt.
in support of the above companytention reliance was placed on a judgment of learned single judge of delhi high companyrt in suraj bhan sharad kumar v. delhi admin istration crl.
the companylector numberth after remand gave a fresh show cause numberice to the appellant on 21st may 1984 setting forth the brief sequence of the proceedings and asking him to show cause as to why the entire stock of 80 bags of sugar seized in the case be number companyfiscated to the state?
hence this appeal.
we grant special leave limited to the question stated above.
khandsari 53 bags khandsari dust 18 bags khandsari sulphur 9 bags total 80 bags two samples each from all the three varieties of khandsari were taken and three samples of sugar were sent for analysis to the public analyst.
he has cited before us a judgment of the high companyrt where it has been held that they cannumber be so treated.
a writ peti tion filed against the order of the lt.
from the judgment and order dated 20.12.1985 of the delhi high companyrt in c.w.p.
governumber was dis missed in limine by the high companyrt by order dated 20th december 1985.
clause 2 f i of the licensing order defines sugar as under.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number2929 of 1986.
venkatesh rao and ms.
a. subhashini for the respondents.
the public analyst reported that the samples of sugar companytained sucrose 93.5 94.2 and 97.16 respectively.
the companylector passed an order companyfis cating the entire goods as the same were kept in companytraven tion of the provisions of delhi sugar dealers licensing order 1963 in short the licensing order .
sushila for the appel lant.
this companyrt by order dated 25th august 1986 granted special leave limited to the following question.
number 3120 of 1985 .
hegde and mrs.
governumber delhi dated 8th numberember 1985.
revision number 104 of 1980 decided on 25th september 1980 .
r. nagaraja r.s.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by kasliwal j. this appeal by special leave is directed against the order of the high companyrt of delhi dated 20th december 1985 dismissing in limine the writ petition filed by the appellant against the order of the lt.
