JUDGMENT S. Saghir Ahmad, J 1. The petitioner by means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution has challenged the order dated 6-6-1988 passed by the District Magistrate, Sitapur, by which he has been detained under the provisions of Prevention of Blackmarketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (No. 7 of 1980) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. This order was served on the petitioner on 18-8-1988 accompanied by the grounds of detention as also other materials, namely Fard Baramadgi dated 19-10-87, statement of S. I. Sri Ramesh Singh, statement of Constable U. T. Lalaram, statement of Constable U. T. Suresh Kumar Tewari and statement of Constable 12 Ishwar Prasad Tewari. Copies of the detention order, the grounds and the documents referred to above have been filed as Annexures B-1 to B-7 with the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite parties. The order of detention is based on single incident of 19-10-87 as set out in the grounds of detention which read as under :- (Order of detention in Hindi omitted-Editor) 3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even if the facts set out in the grounds of detention are taken to be correct, an order of detention under the Act could not have been legally passed as the petitioner had not committed any offence punishable under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act. Section 3 (1) of the Act provides as under : - "3 (1)-The Central Government or a State Government or any officer of the Central Government not below the rank of Joint Secretary to that Government specially empowered for the purposes of this section by that Government, or ally officer of a State Government, not below the rank of a Secretary to that Government specially empowered for the purposes of this section by that Government, may, if satisfied, with respect to any person that with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community it is necessary so to do, make an order directing that such person be detained. Explanation-For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression "acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community" means- (a) Committing or instigating any to commit any offence punishable under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955), or under any other law for the time being in force relating to the control of the production, supply or distribution of, or trade and commerce in, any commodity essential to the community ; or (b) Dealing in any commodity- (i) which is an essential commodity as defined in the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955) or (ii) with respect to which provisions have been made in any such other law as is referred to in clause (a), 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 aforesaid." 4. The stress of the learned counsel for the petitioner is on the explanation to sub-section (1) of section 3 which explains the expression "acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community." It is contended that if a person commits or instigates any person to commit any offence punishable under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 then alone he can be said to be acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance, of supplies of commodities essential to the community. 5. An activity would amount to a prejudicial activity only if such an activity constitutes an offence punishable under the Essential Commodities Act or constitutes instigation of the commission of such an offence or punishable under any other law for the time being in force relating to the control of the production, supply or distribution of, or trade or commerce in any commodity essential to the community. 6. The facts, as set out in the grounds of detention order, indicate that the petitioner had negotiated the sale of Government wheat which the P. W. D. Contractor Sri Ram Saharey was to distribute to the labourers. We put it to the learned Additional Government Advocate whether the negotiation for sale of Government wheat in the manner indicated above would constitute an offence punishable under the Essential Commodities Act and he contended that it would. 7. We put it to the learned Additional Government Advocate whether the negotiation for sale of Government wheat in the manner indicated above would constitute an offence punishable under the Essential Commodities Act and he contended that it would. 7. In support of his contention learned counsel brought to our notice the provisions of the U. P. Foodgrains Dealers' (Licensing and Restriction on Hoarding) Order, 1976 specially the definitions of "approved dealer" and "dealer" as contained in clause 2 (a) and 2 (c) of the Order. The definitions are quoted below :- "2 (a)-"approved dealer" means a person appointed as "agent (Retail)" by the District Magistrate for sale of Government foodgrains. 2 (c)-"dealer" means a person engaged in the business of purchase, sale or storage for sale, of any one of the foodgrains in a quantity of ten quintals or more at any one time or in a quantity of fifty quintals or more of all foodgrains taken together, but does not include the Food Corporation of India or the Uttar Pradesh State Food and Essential Commodities Corporation or any other Corporation established by the Central or State Government for development of seeds or a person who- (i) Stores any foodgrains produced by him or by personal cultivation, and (ii) Does not engage in the business of purchase or sale of foodgrains." 8. The prohibitions are contained in Clauses 3, 3 (a), 8 and 11 of the Order. Learned Additional Government Advocate, however, confined his argument to the provisions of Clause 3 alone and contended that the wheat in question was Government wheat which was meant for distribution to the labourers, and therefore, its sale would be an offence. Wheat, undoubtedly, is an essential commodity but mere negotiation for the sale of wheat would not constitute an offence as the prohibition contained in clause 3 is that no person shall carry on business as a "dealer" or "commission agent" except under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence issued in this behalf by the licensing authority. The word "dealer" as pointed out earlier, has been denned in clause 2 (c) under which it is necessary that a person is engaged in the business of purchase, sale or storage for sale, of the foodgrains. The word "engaged" would not mean an isolated act or transaction. The word "dealer" as pointed out earlier, has been denned in clause 2 (c) under which it is necessary that a person is engaged in the business of purchase, sale or storage for sale, of the foodgrains. The word "engaged" would not mean an isolated act or transaction. What it contemplates is that the person carries on the business as a continuous process of purchase, sale and storage for sale of the foodgrains. 9. In National Projects Construction Corporation Limited v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax, (1969) 74 Income Tax Report 465 : (as reproduced from Law Lexicon) the word "engaged" has been given the following meaning :- "The word "engage" may have variety of meanings depending on the context and setting in which it is used. Ordinarily the expression connotes doing of more than one act or one transaction. Continuity of action is implicit in the meaning of the word. It has also been used in the sense of being busy or conducting or devoting attention or effort or employing oneself. The word "engaged" in the manufacture, production, etc., should normally, therefore, mean continuously occupied in the manufacture, as a principal business as distinguished from a occasional participation or single act or causal employment or a mere supervision without physical participation The extent of activity would be a relevant factor and if such activity is at an extended scale it may be suggestive of being "engaged" in manufacturing activity." 10. In Words and Phrases Permanent Edition Vol. 14-A page 189 the word "Engage" has been given the following meaning :- " "Engage" means to take part in or be employed in, and connotes more than a single act or single transaction and involves some continuity of action, while the word "participate" means simply to take or have a part or share in, and may apply equally to a single act or to many acts. Head v. New York Life Ins. Co., C. C. A. Okl., 43 F. 2d 517, 520." In order that a person is engaged in the business of purchase and sale of the foodgrains, it is necessary to show that he was carrying on business as a continuous process as a normal trading activity. 11. The detention order impugned in this petition does not indicate that the petitioner was engaged in the business of purchase and sale of the foodgrains. 11. The detention order impugned in this petition does not indicate that the petitioner was engaged in the business of purchase and sale of the foodgrains. It only refers to an isolated act of the petitioner in negotiating the sale of the Government wheat for being sold to him at a lesser price. On the basis of this isolated act the District Magistrate proceeded to pass the detention order as he was satisfied that the petitioner was not a "dealer" within the meaning of Section 2 (c) of the Order and had, therefore, committed an offence punishable under section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The District Magistrate has not relied upon sub-clause (b) to the Explanation appended to sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Act. 12. Since we are satisfied that the first contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, which has been discussed above, is sufficient for the disposal of this petition, it is not necessary for us to consider the other contentions. For the reasons stated above the order of detention impugned in this petition cannot be sustained and is hereby quashed with the direction that the petitioner shall be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with some other case.