was left blank. (vi) Due to non-compliance with the provisions of the Control Order, the drawing of samples is without basis. (vii) R.M. Service Centre (supra) does not support the case of the appellant. The action sought to be taken by the appellant is penal in nature and therefore, there cannot be two procedures prescribed for the action. A third party cannot be permitted to collect samples in violation of the control order by stating that prosecution has not been launched thereunder and instead prosecuting the dealer for violation of MDG. 7(viii)No power has been conferred upon the oil manufacturing company to bypass the procedure of drawing of samples. Section 100 Cr.P.C. was made applicable to ensure the sanctity of the investigation as the outcome thereof could result in penal consequences. Grant of such powers to a third party (agency) would be illegal. (ix) The said judgment does not lay down the correct position in law and non-adherence to the control order would vitiate the