# Anoop Baranwal Thekma v. U.P. Public Service Commission - **Citation:** (2000) 3 ILRA 48 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 1999-08-04 - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/anoop-baranwal-thekma-v-u-p-public-service-commission-39537 - **Pages:** 2 ## Text INDIAN LAW REPOSTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2000 48 6. It is not disputed that the drugs as defined, has been included as one of the essential commodities under section 2(a) (vi-a) of the essential Commodities Act, 1955. As drugs are essential commodities and their production, supply and distribution and trade and commerce is controlled by the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Rules framed thereunder, there remains to no doubt that the explanation appended to sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Act is attracted to the present case and the order of detention could not be legally passed. From a close reading of the explanation to sub-section (1) of section 3 of Prevention of Blackmarketing and Maintenance f supplies of essential Commodities Act, 1980, it is clear that the nature of the drugs whether spurious misbranded, or adulterated is not the basis for passing the order but the requirement is that the trade and commerce or indulgence in the production, supply and distribution of the alleged drugs should with a view to making gain in any manner which may directly or indirectly defeat or tend to defeat the provisions of that Act or other law, which, in the present case, may drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Allegation against petitioner is that he stored the spurious medicines for making gain which, if permitted, would defeat provisions of aforesaid Acts. In view of the aforesaid legal position, in our opinion, the detaining authority was not competent to pass an order of detention against petitioner is view of the clear prohibition contained in the explanation to Section 3 (2) of the Act. 7. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 4.8.1999 (Annexure-2) is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to set petitioner at liberty forthwith if his detention is not required in any other case. Petition Allowed. 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 &,9,/ 6,'( &,9,/ 6,'( '$7(' $//$+$%$' '$7(' $//$+$%$' %()25( %()25( 7+( +21·%/( 0 .$7-8 - 7+( +21·%/( 0 .$7-8 - 7+ 7+( +21·%/( '5 &+$8'+$5< - ( +21·%/( '5 &+$8'+$5< - &LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI $QRRS %DUDQZDO 7KHNPD «3HWLWLRQHU 9HUVXV 83 3XEOLF 6HUYLFH &RPPLVVLRQ ...5HVSRQGHQWV &RXQVHO IRU WKH ,Q 3HUVRQ 6KUL $QRRS %DUDQZDO &RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQW 6& &RQVWLWXWLRQ RI ,QGLD $UWLFOH 3&6- ([DPLQDWLRQ ± DGYHUWLVHPHQW FKDOOHQJHG RQ WKH JURXQGV VR WKDW many FDQGLGDWHV GRLQJ //0 KDYH EHHQ SHUPLWWHG WR DSSHDU LQ WKH VDLG H[DPLQDWLRQ ZLWKRXW SRVVHVVLQJ WKUHH \HDUV SUDFWLFH DV ODZ\HUV ± WKUHH \HDUV IURP 5HJLVWUDWLRQ GDWH IURP 83 %DU &RXQFLO Ke VKDOO EH GHHPHG DV SUDFWLFLQJ ODZ\HU SRVVHVVLQJ WKUHH \HDUV H[SHULHQFH By the Court The petitioner is challenging the advertisement for P.C.S.(J) examination of the U.P.. The main ground which he has alleged is that several persons who are doing LL.M. are also being permitted to appear in the aforesaid examination although they have not attended Courts for three years as lawyer. In our opinion, once a person is enrolled as a lawyer by the U.P. 3All] Anoop Baranwal Thekma V. U.P. Public Service Commission 49 Bar council, is should be deemed that he is practising from that date and three years' period will be counted from that date. It can not expected that for each person enquiry should be conducted to ascertain whether a particular person is doing practice and attending the court regularly as an Advocate. The only practicable view can be that the person should be enrolled by the Bar Council as an Advocate and as such it will be deemed that he has attended the Court as practising lawyer from that date. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is dismissed. Petition Dismissed. 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 &,9,/ 6,'( &,9,/ 6,'( '$7(' $//$+$%$' '$7(' $//$+$%$' %()25( %()25( 7+( +21·%/( 6+,7/$ 3' 65,9$67$9$ - 7+( +21·%/( 6+,7/$ 3' 65,9$67$9$ - &LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI 5DP 3XMDQ VRQ RI 6XGKX RWKHUV «3HWLWLRQHUV 9HUVXV '\ 'LUHFWRU RI &RQVROLGDWLRQ *KD]LSXU RWKHUV «5HVSRQGHQWV &RXQVHO IRU 3HWLWLRQHUV 6KUL 6KUHH 3UDNDVK 6LQJK 6KUL 6DQNDWKD 5DL &RXQVHO IRU 5HVSRQGHQW 6& 6KUL 6.9HUPD 83 &RQVROLGDWLRQ RI +ROGLQJV 5XOH $UHDGZLWK VHFWLRQ RI WKH &RQVROLGDWLRQ RI +ROGLQJV $FW 3RZHU RI 5HYLVLRQDO &RXUW RUGHU SDVVHG E\ 62& DIWHU GHQRWLILFDWLRQ XV FKDOOHQJHG EHIRUH ''& 'LVPLVVDO RI 5HYLVLRQ DV QRW PDLQWDLQDEOH KHOGLOOHJDO ±RUGHU TXDVKHG +HOG ± 3DUD 7KHUH LV QRWKLQJ RQ UHFRUG WR SURYH WKDW WKH 6HWWOHPHQW 2IILFHU &RQVROLGDWLRQ ZDV QRW DSSRLQWHG E\ WKH 6WDWH *RYHUQPHQW WKHUHIRUH KH ZDV VXERUGLQDWH WR WKH 'HSXW\ 'LUHFWRU RI &RQVROLGDWLRQ DQG LQ YLHZ RI 6HFWLRQ RI WKH DIRUHVDLG $FW DV DPHQGHG WKH 'HSXW\ 'LUHFWRU RI &RQVROLGDWLRQ KDV MXULVGLFWLRQ WR HQWHUWDLQ WKH UHYLVLRQ DQG GHFLGHG WKH VDPH &DVH ODZ GLVFXVVHG 5' ± $,5 6& 5' $,5 $OOG By the Court 1. This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed, by the petitioners for quashing the order dated 8.1.1991 and 1.3.1988, passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation and Settlement Officer Consolidation respectively. Further prayer has been made for issue of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.1 (Deputy Director of Consolidation) to reconsider the case on merit and finally decide it. 2. The brief facts as stated in the writ petition are that the petitioners were recorded in the basic year Khatauni and the respondents were given joint chak over plot nos. 7, 22 and 108. Respondents moved an application under Rule 109-A (I) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules for partition before the consolidation court and the same was decided in their favour. On the basis of the orders darted 25.8.1976 and 12.1.1979 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation and Consolidation officer respectively the respondents 3 to 6 move an application for partition under Rule 109 of U.P.