He alleges that, roundabout January, 1974, the District Magistrate of Keonjhar held a meeting at which he insisted that 25 per cent of tyres and tubes available for free sale by the licensed dealers be sold only for use on vehicles registered in Keonjhar on which tax had been paid under the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, and then issued a circular letter to dealers directing that this be done by them.
But, he has failed to discharge the difficult burden of doing that.
The petitioner has tried hard to prove the mala fides of the District Magistrate in passing the detention order.
From the judgment and order dated 15 1 75 of the Orissa High Court in C.J.C. No.
The petitioner states that he vehemently protested against the District Magistrates instructions which were invalid under the law.
Bishen Narain, B. P. Maheshwari, Suresh Sethi and R. K. Maheshwari, for the petitioner, In S. L. P. 267/75 .
He states that, while the Truck Owners Association wanted to raise the rates of freight, the rates of the companypany were number raised and that this further displeased the truck owners Association.
39/75 .
32 dated 15 2 1974 u s. 7 E. C. Act was registered and charge sheeted against you.
The provisions relating to licensed dealers did number warrant such sales which were struck by the provisions of clause 2 of the Orissa Automobile Tyres and Tubes Control Order, 1973.
The petitioner goes on to state that his sister, Smt.
He also asserts that he objected to the formation of an allotment companymittee by the District Magistrate for the purpose of distributing tyres and tubes in the District with the result that the District Magistrate was displeased with the petitioner.
Such sales companyld be made by him in another capacity and only according to the provisions of the relevant Control Order.
You, as Manager of the United Commercial Co. received 149 truck tyres 137 through Tata Nagar Transport Corporation, Barbil and 12 through Carry Co. Barbil between 14 2 1974 and 27 4 1974 as a fleet owner for use in a fleet of 10 trucks maintained by you.
During enquiry by the Special Magistrate, Barbil only six number of tyres were found in your companypanys Godown and your office incharge Shri Shamasunder Pandit stated these six tyres to be the only stock in hand.
39/75 .
Gobind Das and B. Parthasarthy, for the respondents In W. No.
He asserts that he has always resisted the illegal demands of truck owners.
He asserts that he is a registered dealer under the Orissa Automobile Tyres and Tubes Control Order, 1973.
This reveals that you have disposed of tyres received as a fleet owner otherwise in companytravention of law.
On verification of 8 trucks belonging to your fleet on 19 5 1974 it was found that only 3 tyres fitted to these trucks were new and the rest of the tyres were either too old or resoled or damaged ones.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BEG, J. This habeas companypus petition is directed against a detention order dated 6 7 1974 passed by the District Magistrate of Keonjhar in Orissa.
On the same date, grounds of this satisfaction were companymunicated to the petitioner giving the following particulars On 15 2 1974 you received Automobile Truck tyres from Madras Rubber Factory through Carry Co. at Barbil as Manager of United Commercial Company, Barbil and these tyres were specified to be used in the fleet of trucks owned by United Commercial Co. as a fleet owner.
But instead of using the tyres in the fleet of United Commercial Co. you sold two of those tyres the same day 15 2 1974 to one Narayan Singh at Rs.
5400 without authority and cash memo.
He alleges that the Central Govt.
Singhbum, in Bihar started a transport business at Barbil in 1970, under the name of United Commercial Company hereinafter referred to as the Company which bad a fleet of ten vehicles.
K. Sen, B. P. Maheshwari, Suresh Sethi and R. K. Maheshwari, for the petitioner In W. P. No.
Sarda Devi of Chakradharpur, Distt.
But, he claimed that, on 18 12 1973, the Controller of Supplies had issued an order permitting free sales by licence holders to the extent of 25 per cent of their stocks.
has number fixed the selling prices of tyres and tubes at any time.
By the above acts of yours the maintenance of supplies and services of essential companymodities namely Automobile tyres have been dislocated, The petitioner alleges that he is a law abiding citizen who, after companypleting his studies in 1966, started a business under the name and style of M s. Nancy Automobiles, Rourkela, in Orissa, to deal in auto car parts, which he carried on until about the end of 1972 and, thereafter, he became a Director of a private Transport Company, Soon afterwards, in 1972, he started business under the name of Vivek.
Automobiles in Barbil in the District of Keonjhar.
He admits that he is the Sole Proprietor of the said business and was engaged in the purchase and sale of automobile spare parts, tyres and tubes.
According to the petitioner, this Companys companypetition with the truck owners deprived them of big companytracts and thus he incurred their displeasure.
On this issue Barbil S. case No.
He states that, although originally the Control order companyered only 50 per cent of the tyres and tubes received by a licensee, subsequently a total restriction was imposed upon dealings in these goods which had been declared essential companymodities.
He suggests that the District Magistrate wanted to please the truck owners.
The petitioner also alleges that, in Barbil, which is a mining area, there is companysiderable transport business and that truck owners in that District had formed an Association called The Barbil Mining Area Truck Owners Association.
1133/74.
The petitioner does number state his own position in or companynection with the United Commercial Company, but, his assertions show, on the one hand that he was associated with this Company as its Manager, as stated in the grounds of the order of detention, and, on the other hand, that he was anxious to justify sales of tyres to the public at any price which was numberpart of the business of this companypany.
According to the opposite parties prices were also companytrolled.
