Patna High Court
Prahlad Manjhi @ Prahlad MaziversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The Court set aside the confiscation order dated 09.12.2022 for lack of notice and directed the issuance of a fresh show‑cause notice.
Summary
The petitioner, a fertilizer dealer, challenged the confiscation of 56 bags of fertilizer and a vehicle by the District Magistrate‑Cum‑Collector under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, alleging that no show‑cause notice was served and thus his right to natural justice was violated. The High Court noted that the petitioner had not been given prior notice and that the respondents failed to produce proof of service of the notice as directed in an earlier order dated 22.09.2025. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned confiscation order dated 09.12.2022 and remanded the matter to the District Magistrate‑Cum‑Collector to issue a fresh show‑cause notice containing the proposed action and any supporting report. The fresh notice must allow the petitioner ten days to explain, after which a reasoned order on merits must be passed, ensuring an opportunity of hearing. The Court emphasized that the exercise should be completed within eight weeks and that any order must be communicated to the petitioner. No merits of the confiscation were decided, and the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the confiscation order passed without service of a show‑cause notice violates the principles of natural justice.
- Whether the authority had jurisdiction under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act to confiscate fertilizer lawfully purchased by the petitioner.
- Whether the order should be set aside and a fresh show‑cause notice issued to the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Essential Commodities Act, 1955 — s. 6A
Subjects
- Essential Commodities Act
- Section 6A
- confiscation
- natural justice
- show cause notice
- certiorari
- mandamus
- fertilizer dealership
- High Court writ
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4311 of 2025
======================================================
Prahlad Manjhi @ Prahlad Mazi, S/o Sri Gopal Manjhi, Proprietor of M/s
Prahlad Krishi Kendra, Resident of Village- Vishay, P.S- Tarapur, District-
Munger
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Munger, District- Munger.
2. The District Magistrate-cum- Collector, Munger, District- Munger.
3. The District Treasury Officer, Munger, District- Munger.
4. The District Agriculture Officer, Munger, District- Munger.
5. The Block Agricultural Officer, Tarapur, District- Munger.
6. The Officer-in-Charge, Tarapur Police Station, Tarapur, District- Munger.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel (07)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
8 11-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief(s):-
“A. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari,
or any other appropriate writ, quashing
the order dated 09.12.2022 passed by the
District Magistrate-cum-Collector,
Munger, in Confiscation (Supply) Case No.
14/2022-23, whereby and whereunder, the
concerned respondent ordered the
confiscation of 56 bags of fertilizer
(comprising 43 bags of Urea, 10 bags of
DAP, and 3 bags of MOP), a vehicle
bearing registration number BR-10GB-
5947, and additional fertilizer stored in the
petitioner's godown, purportedly under
Patna High Court CWJC No.4311 of 2025(8) dt.11-05-2026
2/4
Section 6A of the Essential Commodities
Act, 1955.
B. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus,
or any other appropriate writ, directing
and commanding the respondents to:
i. Declare that the respondent authorities
have no authority to confiscate the
fertilizer legally purchased by the
petitioner and duly stored in the godown
under lawful entitlement.
ii. Refund the amount of INR 10,04,464/-
(Rupees Ten Lakhs Four Thousand Four
Hundred Sixty-Four Only), which was
deposited in the State Treasury following
the actions taken under Confiscation
(Supply) Case No. 14/2022-23, which is
the proceeds from the sale of fertilizer
unlawfully seized from the Petitioner's
vehicle (BR-10GB-5947) and godown,
despite having been purchased by the
Petitioner through a cash credit account
(CC Account).
iii. Allow the Petitioner to resume the
dealership business of fertilizers in
compliance with the Order dated
01.11.2022, as per letter no. 1920 issued
by Respondent No. 4.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that no prior notice was given to the
petitioner before passing the impugned order dated 09.12.2022
and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside on the ground of
violation of the principles of natural justice and equity.
4. This Court, vide order dated 22.09.2025, has
Patna High Court CWJC No.4311 of 2025(8) dt.11-05-2026
3/4
directed the respondent-authorities to file proof as to whether
the show cause notice dated 10.09.2022 (Annexure R/C) had
been served on the petitioner or not. Accordingly, the
respondents authorities were directed to file a supplementary
counter affidavit bringing on record the proof of service of the
show cause notice but the same has not been done till date.
5. Having regard to the same, the impugned order
dated 09.12.2022 passed by the Respondent No. 2, i.e., the
District Magistrate -Cum-Collector, Munger is set aside. The
matter is remanded back to the District Magistrate-Cum-
Collector, Munger (Respondent No. 2) for issuing a fresh show
cause notice to the petitioner. The fresh show cause notice shall
contain the proposed action to be taken against the petitioner
and shall also enclose a copy of the report, if any, relied upon by
the authority and call for his explanation by giving sufficient
time, preferably ten days. On receipt of the explanation
submitted by the petitioner, the authority shall pass a reasoned
orders on merits duly taking into consideration the explanation
submitted by the petitioner.
6. It is needless to mention that before passing any
orders, the petitioner shall be given an opportunity of hearing.
The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as
Patna High Court CWJC No.4311 of 2025(8) dt.11-05-2026
4/4
possible preferably within a period of 8 weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. Any order passed shall be
communicated to the petitioner.
7. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the
merits of the case and leaving all questions and issues to be
decided by the authorities.
8. With the above directions, the present writ petition
stands disposed of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Bhardwaj/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.