Telangana High Court
Srirangam Bala Krishna vs The State Of Telangana And 7 Others on 17 October, 2022
Author: Lalitha Kanneganti
Bench: Lalitha Kanneganti
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION No.38289 of 2022
O R D E R:
The writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
".... to an appropriate Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the in action of the respondents herein neither considered the petitioner application dated 15.06.2022 nor yet implemented the judgment passed in Crl. Appeal No 101/2013 dated 15.09. 2014 the said judgment passed by the Honble Principal Sessions Judge Warangal under Section 374 CrPc r/w Section 6-C of EC Act or not yet return the petitioner amount despite respondents herein received the petitioner application dated 15.06.2022 but still respondents herein not yet return the petitioner amount in EC Act and same as been illegal arbitrary unjust and its nothing but misuse of their official powers and also vitiation of Article 19 21 of the Constitution of India and also its contrary and violation of the Honble Principal Sessions Judge Warangal judgment passed in Crl Appeal No 101/2013 dated 15.09.2014 and consequently direct the respondents herein forthwith return/release the amount Rs 7,65,050/- Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty Five Thousand Fifty only along with interest by deducting the 10 percentage of value of the confiscation of stock as per the judgment passed by the Honble Principal Sessions Judge Warangal in Crl. Appeal No. 101/2013 dated 15.09.2014 by considering the petitioner Application dated 15.06.2022 and ...".W.P.No.38289 of 2022 2
2. Mr. Palle Nageswar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has given a representation to the respondents on 15.06.2022 requesting to return the amount by implementing the judgment passed in Criminal Appeal No.101 of 2013, dated 15.09.2014 under Section 374 Cr.P.C r/w Section 6-C of Essential Commodities Act. He submits that the petitioner is the proprietor of M/s. Sri Sai Ganesh Rice Merchant at Maripeda Bungalow Town and Mandal, Mahabubabad District. He submits that the respondents have seized the stocks of the petitioner and a show cause notice was issued under Section 6 (b) of EC Act on 07.04.2013 and thereafter, orders were passed on 06.05.2013 directing to confiscate 49% of the value of the seized stock worth Rs.7,65,050/- in favour of the State Government. He submits that aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner has preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.101 of 2013 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal and thereafter, the said appeal was allowed in part modifying the extent of confiscation to 10% of the value of the stock and the petitioner is entitled to get refund of the balance amount as he has remitted the value of the seized stock to the Government. He W.P.No.38289 of 2022 3 submits that though the criminal appeal was allowed in the year 2014, the petitioner has been made to run from pillar to post and so far no amount is refunded to the petitioner.
3. The learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has placed the written instructions of the Collector, Mahabubabad before this court and submits that the District Treasury Officer, Hanamkonda has issued a reconciliation report of challan for sending to the Commissioner of Civil Supplies for sanction of an amount of Rs.2,98,369/- for complying the orders of the Principle District and Sessions Judge, Warangal in Crl.Appeal No. 101 of 2013 dated 15.09.2014. He submits that the proposals have been sent to the Commissioner of Civil Supplies in order to accord sanction and draw the said deposited amount to the District Civil Supplies Officer, Hanamkonda to refund by prefer refund bill and pay it to the petitioner as per the orders of the Criminal Appeal. It is stated that soon after receiving of the sufficient orders from the Commissioner of Civil Supplies, the District Civil Supplies Officer will prepare the refund bill and pay to the petitioner.
4. The judgment has attained finality in Criminal Appeal No.101 of 2013 in the year 2014. Even after lapse of eight years, W.P.No.38289 of 2022 4 the respondents have not taken any steps to release the amounts. This court is not able to appreciate the action of the respondents. The respondents have not taken any decision or have refunded the amounts from the last eight years. Though the petitioner has given representation on 15.06.2022, no action has been initiated by the respondents. Hence, the respondents are directed to consider the representation to settle the amounts as expeditiously as possible, but not later than six (6) weeks.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
_______________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 17th October, 2022 PKR W.P.No.38289 of 2022 5 THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI 188 W.P. No. 38289 of 2022 Dt.17.10.2022 PKR